Older/Vintage Bikes --- What's the Appeal?

[charliedid]

I've been riding bikes all my life and have worked in the industry off and on for 25 or so years, with some connection to european road racing bikes and their history here in the USA.

In 1976 I went from being a BMX wanna-be to riding a road bike around lake michigan with 80 other kids and did a similar trip with a different route the next summer. I've done a bit of casual Mtn Bike racing and a few "gravel" events but was never a bike racer. I'n done some longer tours as an adult (month's long) and ridden in numerous countries. I've also been a (mostly) year round commuter to closing in on 30 years.

I've owned too many bikes (some fancy, some not) to remember and at times have run across a model of bike either at work or on the street that I had completely forgotten about owning. I tend to lose interest in them, find some fault or simply want to try a new bike out. I currently have only three bikes, which to many a non-cyclist is understandably two too many. Often at work, someone walks in with a bike and seems almost upset when we don't stop and inquire and generally gush about it. So many times it's just an old bike that will cost more than the owner wants to spend for us to work on. Yes, a 1970's or 1980's campy equipped road bike is just an old bike to some people. That's just life. That said, we are non-judgemental and will treat you and your bike with respect and care like any other. We want to know the history and what you have in mind. We are eager and willing to help, within reason.

I know many here enthusiastically enjoy older/vintage bikes and many conversations revolve around them either as having been recently purchased, refurbished or as a PSA in the Classifieds. Some of you are collectors with a vast number and I assume some simply never sell a bike after being purchased so end up accumulating. Often with hobbies people get into something and then seek to learn the history of it and bikes are by no means unique, Just take cameras and stereo equipment not to mention watches as examples. Minus the occasional bike I run across, I don't have a nostalgic/romantic streak in me when it comes to older bikes and I have never wanted to do an Eroica styled ride.

I don't believe in any sort of golden age, and generally think that modern bikes are better in virtually every way and much more enjoyable to ride. I know some feel similar but still hold dear some love for the old. If someone gave me a (insert brand name here) vintage bike in collector condition, I would turn right around and sell it. I'm not a collector...

So, for those of you that get excited by older bikes, what is the appeal? Is it personal attachment to a long help possession? Is it wanting to connect to the past in some meaningful way in order to make sense of the present? Are you simply fond of the styling and perceived quality of older bikes? or is it something entirely different? Does it stop with bikes, or does it carry through in other interests?

I look forward to hearing your stories.

[Ken Robb]

Part of their appeal for me is their appearance. I love lugged steel bikes with some judiciously applied contrasting paint on lugs, head tubes, fork crowns. Many old bikes accept fatter tires than are commonly useable on newer bikes.

I'm happy to see some new bikes that will also accept fatter tires than 25mm.

[Pastashop]

For me there are are practical, emotional, and aesthetic reasons.

Just looks-wise, I really like the appearance and proportions of a 57-60 cm, skinny tubed steel frame with classic wheels and drop bars.

I also got into bikes in the early '90s, and spent many of my formative years riding and working on these bikes. Things that were desirable yet unattainable then are now available and somewhat affordable.

Finally, bikes are usually fatigue-loaded structures that benefit from large clearances and springy response. Skinny tubes of steel are really well suited for this mode of usage. Plus, the tuning of ride characteristics benefits from 100+ years of trial-and-error and a bit of engineering – it's a mature, dominant design that optimizes many things simultaneously.

[Tickdoc]

Oh man. So many thoughts run through my head when I read your post.

I am nostalgic and try to hang on to things. When I was a kid (early teens) I fell in love with bicycles, but couldn't afford anything nice. (I did have a super sweet all chrome super mongoose, but that is another story ;-)

So, I bought cycling magazines and fell in love with the steel campy equipped bikes I could not afford. The proportions, the shiny bits, the history....they are sex on wheels!

I saved for four years and ended up buying a cannodale black lighting with sun tour superbe pro. It wasn't the Italian bike I was lusting for, but it was light and aero and I fell in love with it. There were no Italians to be had in my part of the country, anyways. I didn't know aluminum was stiff and the ride was punishing. I was fourteen years old and thought it was smooth and fast as a rocket. I rode it through college and eventually put it in the attic, then sold it to a friend who needed to loose some weight. ( bastard still has it, doesn't ride it, but won't sell it back to me)

So, I quit riding until I needed to loose weight myself and then jumped back in. Another aluminum, then an aero carbon, and then a grail ciocc steel just like one I used to lust for.

Fast forward twenty years and those bikes I lusted for are now affordable. I spent more on my first set of custom wheels than I did for my grail bike. Additionally, they are fun to look for, and they are more fun to ride, too! Cheap, fun, add in the "take me back to my youth" warm fuzzies I get from them and I am a happy man.

Rode my old ciocc San cristobal on our group ride today. It's a mix of campy 10 speed, with super slick ambrosio nemesis tubular wheels built by the master old potato himself.

About 5 miles in on today's ride, one of my riding buddies was asking me what the appeal is, and what the ride was like of steel. His last steel was a generic 10 speed in high school and meant nothing to him. I said it is kind of like driving an old rolls Royce. It just glides over the road like magic. It is not as fast as a new bike, nor as light, but so much more satisfying, to me at least. The shifting of campy is another thing that I just never experienced with shimano or sram, but did with the old sun tour superbe pro. Nothing is as crisp and solid and it feels so good in my hands.

We finished a chilly 40 at a decent 18.6 pace and it was a blast. The new venge next to me probably had a six pound weight advantage over my trusty old steed, but no one noticed it, and anytime I bring the old ciocc along, other riders are continuously stealing glances at the ciocc. I am vain enough to admit I like a bike that garners admirers.

Does that help clear thing up any?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/Handgod/8B12157B-C5F4-4C9E-B88B-0AAA8D4E3A3B_zpsl05kfrwy.jpg

[Tandem Rider]

I have a foot in both camps. I have a couple from the '70s that I still ride occasionally but not frequently, one I acquired, one was a race bike. I have a custom steel from about 88 that I still ride some, it was a race bike. These are the 3 survivors. I do get a kick out of riding them occasionally. The 2 race bikes have had the snot ridden out of them. :eek:

That being said, new bikes are faster and lighter, have better shifting etc. I enjoy riding them too, I would much rather race on a new bike than an old one. There is no point to either ignoring or worshiping mechanical improvements. Look at the picture of Ferdi Kubler in the other thread, steel frame, dt shifters, probably only 4 cogs in the back, 36 or so spokes, toe clips, you get the idea. Bike probably came in at 23-24 pounds. Don't for an instant think that if he was offered the use of a modern race bike instead he would have turned it down, he would have ridden even faster :D

[texbike]

Part of their appeal for me is their appearance.

aesthetic reasons.



This is their primary appeal to me. I LOVE the aesthetic of classic, European style steel road bikes. There's just something that looks right about them to me. Plus, the particular vintage steel bikes that I have just so happen to ride fantastically. So, there's the ride aspect and feel of them as well that appeals to me.

I have the same attraction to older mechanical transportation devices such as cars and motorcycles. In many respects, newer options are superior to older cars/motorcycles like a 356, early 911, XKE, '65 Fastback, Norton Commando, Ducati 900SS, etc. However, each of these examples has transcended basic "competence" and has become an iconic design and work of art. I feel the same way about a number of vintage steel bikes when compared to their modern brethren. They're just cool.

Texbike

[stephenmarklay]

For me a lot of it is the look. Also however, I like steel for its longevity. I like the idea of a frame being around for the long haul and steel does that.


Another big draw for me was the craftsmanship. The days when an Italian bike was made in Italy and a America bike was made in the America. There are certainly some carbon examples of this but most are out of China or Taiwan etc.

To me a fine steel bike like a Kirk or Winter etc are art with wheels.

[Grumbs]

Sounds to me like you do get it. I'm sure there is at least one thing in your life that you have a more than utilitarian appreciation of? Well that's all it is! Simple. Of course everyone must have their own unique brand of interest, nostalgia mixed in there for some, aesthetics a more prominent appeal for others.

I've never had any wish for anyone to sweat my bikes or bike choices, but I can appreciate other people's bikes and I even appreciate their interest in showing them off, so long as it doesn't cross the line into creepy fetishism.



I've been riding bikes all my life and have worked in the industry off and on for 25 or so years, with some connection to european road racing bikes and their history here in the USA.

In 1976 I went from being a BMX wanna-be to riding a road bike around lake michigan with 80 other kids and did a similar trip with a different route the next summer. I've done a bit of casual Mtn Bike racing and a few "gravel" events but was never a bike racer. I'n done some longer tours as an adult (month's long) and ridden in numerous countries. I've also been a (mostly) year round commuter to closing in on 30 years.

I've owned too many bikes (some fancy, some not) to remember and at times have run across a model of bike either at work or on the street that I had completely forgotten about owning. I tend to lose interest in them, find some fault or simply want to try a new bike out. I currently have only three bikes, which to many a non-cyclist is understandably two too many. Often at work, someone walks in with a bike and seems almost upset when we don't stop and inquire and generally gush about it. So many times it's just an old bike that will cost more than the owner wants to spend for us to work on. Yes, a 1970's or 1980's campy equipped road bike is just an old bike to some people. That's just life. That said, we are non-judgemental and will treat you and your bike with respect and care like any other. We want to know the history and what you have in mind. We are eager and willing to help, within reason.

I know many here enthusiastically enjoy older/vintage bikes and many conversations revolve around them either as having been recently purchased, refurbished or as a PSA in the Classifieds. Some of you are collectors with a vast number and I assume some simply never sell a bike after being purchased so end up accumulating. Often with hobbies people get into something and then seek to learn the history of it and bikes are by no means unique, Just take cameras and stereo equipment not to mention watches as examples. Minus the occasional bike I run across, I don't have a nostalgic/romantic streak in me when it comes to older bikes and I have never wanted to do an Eroica styled ride.

I don't believe in any sort of golden age, and generally think that modern bikes are better in virtually every way and much more enjoyable to ride. I know some feel similar but still hold dear some love for the old. If someone gave me a (insert brand name here) vintage bike in collector condition, I would turn right around and sell it. I'm not a collector...

So, for those of you that get excited by older bikes, what is the appeal? Is it personal attachment to a long help possession? Is it wanting to connect to the past in some meaningful way in order to make sense of the present? Are you simply fond of the styling and perceived quality of older bikes? or is it something entirely different? Does it stop with bikes, or does it carry through in other interests?

I look forward to hearing your stories.

[bigbill]

I have two steel Nobilette GT's from the 90's because I wanted one back then but couldn't afford it. Now I have a 93 vintage US Team and a 97 vintage Team Shaklee bike that I've had repainted and put around 1000 miles on it this year. I also have a Merckx MX Leader that I bought new in 1999.

It's not like buying an old car that may not be reliable, a vintage or classic bike is as reliable as you make it. The Shaklee bike is built with alloy Athena 11. New technology with an old school look.

Plus it's fun to mix it up on group rides with bikes that are lighter and therefore "better".

[cnighbor1]

''I don't believe in any sort of golden age, and generally think that modern bikes are better in virtually every way and much more enjoyable to ride. I know some feel similar but still hold dear some love for the old. If someone gave me a (insert brand name here) vintage bike in collector condition, I would turn right around and sell it. I'm not a collector...''
that statement includes a lot of different frame types
are you putting into one big pile Carbon fiber, Ti, Aluminum , Combination of those
MTB, road Bikes, gravel bikes etc
all have some limitations
There is a big evolution going on in the frame and component design today
so there is no way to state what you stated and have it mean anything at all
classic steel lugged frames were and still are a very refined art form whose goal was to win races. They still ride better that most modern frames being built of different materials of which they are still trying to figure out the ride quality
Components have improved and do function better but a lot has to do with racing and not having time for a missed shift
in conclusion I prefer classic steel frames built by some great builders

[vitaly66]

Ditto to all the above: aesthetics, craftsmanship, ride quality. Something about fine old steel just has a nice "ring" to it.

And yes, I'll admit to a bit of sentimentality as well. Both of my two vintage bikes were purchased new from the shop when I was a much younger man, scraping together every dime to make these purchases. Then, as it turned out, through the twisty course my life would follow, the bikes proceeded to spend decades in the darkness of time-capsule storage.

We were reunited to the light of day just a few years ago. It was like getting this amazing gift from my younger self to my older self -- at a time when I really needed it.

Year before last I put over 4,000 miles in group rides on a 1974 Raleigh International, numerous metric centuries. Performance-wise it doesn't seem like we give much of anything to other riders on more modern bikes (with the exception of water bottle cage braze-ons!)

And over these recent holidays I have been riding and rediscovering my 1982 Trek 730. Oh man, what a fabulous frame this is. You can be sure I'll be doing more with this one in the year to come...

[choke]

I wish that I could write as eloquently as Velotel so that I could properly convey my thoughts but I can't so....

As others have said, looks are certainly a part of the appeal. When I walk into a bike shop today and glance at the bikes sitting on the floor, they don't make me smile inside like an old bike does. I don't want to linger and gaze at the bikes, looking at the small details like I once did on a visit to a shop. The modern bikes appear cold and lifeless to me while a classic steel frame is warm and inviting. I'm sure that sounds strange but I don't know how else to put it. The craftsmanship angle is appealing, when you look a beautifully thinned lug you know someone spent some time with a file in his hand. There are certainly modern bikes which have that kind of hands-on work but those tend to come from the small shops. I suppose that such hands-on is also involved in a lot of carbon bikes as many are hand-laid but it just doesn't manifest itself in ways that it does on an older steel frame.

I also tend to gravitate, not only in bikes but in many other things, to more esoteric brands. I've only owned two bikes from the big brands, a Cannondale MTB which I purchased when I first got seriously into cycling and an inexpensive Specialized Sirrus which was my first road bike after the Murray of my youth. I only rode the Specialized for a few months, it was a test to see if I wanted to own a road bike and once I found that I enjoyed it I replaced it with a Ciöcc. I like owning something that not everyone else has and that I won't see a dozen of if I go to an organized ride.

Regarding older parts, there was a time that I would have agreed with you that the newer stuff is better. A few years ago I built up a bike for Cino Heroica which meant pedals with toe clips and friction DT shifters. It only took a few rides on that bike for me to feel that they weren't really inferior, in particular the shifting. I find that I actually enjoy using friction shifting more than index these days and not too long ago I pulled a pair of 10sp Ergos off the bike I ride the most and replaced them with a set of Campy Retrofrictions. I feel more "connected" to the shifting - I have to think about when and where to shift rather than just move a lever and that appeals to me on some level. If I could find a decent supply of older non-Ergo Campy levers at a good price I might well remove the Ergos from many of the other bikes as well. I use clipless pedals on most of my bikes, I do like them and modern shoes, but on the bikes that have toe clips I don't feel that I really give up all that much. I think that the only place that modern parts outperform older ones is in the weight department.

In the end, very few modern bikes and certainly no carbon bikes move me in a way that an older steel bike does. How often have you seen a pantographed chainstay?

http://www.cycle.ciocctoo.com/losa4.jpg

[bocobiking]

I agree with the mentioned ride quality and aesthetic reasons. I would add that one of the things I've always loved about bicycles is that they are the simple machine, elegant in their minimalism. In contrast to the automobile, they knife through space rather than plowing through it. They don't make noise, and they don't crowd the streets; airy empty space is part of a bicycle frame. Their components operate simply and intuitively; it is simple and satisfying to work on and overhaul these parts. I like friction shifting for the same reason I like manual transmissions: the rider/driver feels more in touch with the machine.

To me, the classic steel bikes are better examples of this simple machine than the current carbon fiber bicycles. These latter bikes seem to be trying to shake off simplicity. They are made of space age materials and their components have become "black boxes" incapable of being worked on. They no longer operate mechanically, but electronically and hydraulically. Current bikes are no longer silent; one can hear the deep hum of approaching carbon fiber.

I think the contemporary bicycle scene is informed by a set of assumptions that I question: faster is better, more speeds are better than fewer speeds, newer is always better than older, effortless push-button shifting and braking is better, etc.

So for me, the allure of classic bikes is not just about the bike, but about the whole bicycling experience and what it means.

[charliedid]

Thanks for the responses so far.

It's very interesting to see where people are coming from. One of the coolest things is the idea of being able to buy something that was unattainable in the past (for whatever reason) and is now. I guess that is one part of the romantic side of things. I think for some it was monetary but for others simply not available at all.

In fact I have run into many people who came to the US from other parts of the world who never had access to nice bikes, except to dream about them through the occasional magazine. Just after posting this I went on a ride and young-ish guy with a eastern european or slavic accent past me (of course he did) on a 1982ish Colnago. He whizzed past, complementing on the brand of bike I was riding. I don't know his story but...

Regarding the ride quality and capabilities of older vs newer bikes. I had a TREK 720 way back when in the early 80's (and have ridden a few since) and toured on it without incident and it was a very nice bike. That said, the bike I just rode is a brand new Gunnar Grand Tour. Very contemporary True Temper OS with 1x11 drivetrain, lots of made in America parts from White Industries, Cane Creek Paul, Berthoud saddle etc. Sorry but the Gunnar is a better bike in every way. :-)

[weaponsgrade]

Nostalgia, though it wasn't until 99/00 that I got into road riding. I like the way (new) steel rides. I had some nice older steel, but after having had a chance to ride back to back with a Moots, I've concluded that old steel rides like a tank. I've since sold my vintage rides but am still holding onto a 70s Colnago Super. My main ride these days is a Kirk. The lugs check off the nostalgia requirement and the new steel checks off the performance requirement.

[Tickdoc]

Regarding the ride quality and capabilities of older vs newer bikes. I had a TREK 720 way back when in the early 80's (and have ridden a few since) and toured on it without incident and it was a very nice bike. That said, the bike I just rode is a brand new Gunnar Grand Tour. Very contemporary True Temper OS with 1x11 drivetrain, lots of made in America parts from White Industries, Cane Creek Paul, Berthoud saddle etc. Sorry but the Gunnar is a better bike in every way. :-)

Well I think you do get it, because a Gunnar, at least any Gunnar I've seen, is a modern geometry version of a classic. Steel, affordable, customizable, and a modern classic.:beer:

it is definitely not the next plastic wonder with a press fit bb and electronic drive train that I would expect you to be riding from the initial post.

[charliedid]

Well I think you do get it, because a Gunnar, at least any Gunnar I've seen, is a modern geometry version of a classic. Steel, affordable, customizable, and a modern classic.:beer:

it is definitely not the next plastic wonder with a press fit bb and electronic drive train that I would expect you to be riding from the initial post.

Ha! We are all biased towards our own predilection and I have owned way more steel bikes than anything but I've ridden and owned some pretty nice plastic bikes...

If "steel is real" does that make all the other materials a myth? ;-)

Edit: The last bike I unloaded was in fact a Di2 carbon bike.

[ceolwulf]

I built a beautiful Corsa Extra a couple years ago. Modern components (Veloce), so only thing vintage was the frame really. Don't have it any more.

Now I ride a three year old aluminum Scott Speedster, with SRAM Rival to boot (it's okay but Veloce is nicer). It's the sort of very humble beast no one is ever going to look twice at. I love it. Not all that much lighter than the Merckx was, but so much stiffer, not just the bottom bracket area but the front end, much more confident descending. I think the Corsa Extra was likely not designed with my weight in mind, but still. And while the Merckx is supposed to be smooth refined classic steel and the Scott is supposed to be harsh crude big tube aluminum, ... the fact is the Speedster's ride quality is not any worse. Maybe the front end buzzes a little more. But the ride quality is 90% in the tires anyway.

Very unlikely to ride vintage any more. A nice old Bianchi to hang on the wall? maybe. Now, what I would like is a classic looking but modern steel machine. A Jaegher with Chorus for example. Best of both worlds.

I also don't really get why the new carbon bikes are so "impersonal" and so on. Sure there's a lot of machinery involved and it's usually a team effort instead of a solo craftsperson. But there's a *lot* of effort goes into making those. Not to mention all the labour and love invested by the designers and engineers. Doesn't that count for anything?

[NHAero]

Aesthetics for sure. However, I'm pretty convinced from seeing some vintage frames stripped of paint that our contemporary masters are actually making steel frames better than most of the vintage folks did. My Dave Anderson stainless is just a rolling work of art, and we've seen a lot from Dave Kirk and others here that are of the same level of craft.
The Nuovo Record Campy stuff is beautiful and nicer than almost anything I see today.
Attachment to an object that you may have used through the decades. My Bob Jackson was built for me in 1972, it was my only ride for over 30 years, I have no idea how many miles are on it. It's just part of my life! It's too big for me (especially TT) as I age but it is set up with fenders and a rack and toe clips and straps and definitely gets ridden. I do feel that modern components work better so it's 9 speed indexing rather than all the old Campy stuff which sits in a drawer.
I think if I live long enough to not be able to ride a bike, the Jackson will be built up with the old Campy and hung on the wall :-)

[Ralph]

Good points above about older bikes. IMHO it is about nostalgia only. Strip the paint off some of those old frames from the 60's and 70's (like Paramounts and Raleigh Pro's) and check out the workmanship, and put them on an alignment table....and maybe some of that lust for the old stuff will disappear.

New bikes....whether modern steel, aluminum, or carbon are better in every way....so much better in fact.....I have no desire to own another old bike. And I started riding in 73 on a chromed lug Schwinn Paramount ....a piece of junk compared to a modern Kirk, my CAAD 10 (or my custom steel Jonathan Greene with Enve fork), or a nice carbon frame bike.

[d_douglas]

I Agree with the OP - I just don't have the fascination with vintage bikes that others have. My wife gave me a CINELLI SC frame when we got engaged and I thought it was so extravagant when I was a pretty broke university student. I built it up in various guises - mostly Record 9spd, and it was a heavy, elegant, fun ride.

I later bought a Speesvagen and it excelled in every way over the Cinelli with newer, but similar parts. I couldn't bring myself to sell it because of the giftor, but in the end, I decided that I was keeping it only for purposes of sentimentality. The SV Is simply a better bike than the SC, and since I'm not a collector, it had to go.

I sold it here and tossed in the cash to put Hawaii fund, determined not to absorb the profit into my personal cycling addiction ;)

It was a cool bike, but nowhere as cool as my SV!

[weisan]

Nostalgia is a good thing. Memories of the past and dreams of the future give meaning to the present.

Better in every way...really? Depends on what metrics you use.

If money is the barometer of happiness, then obviously the rich and the famous are the happiest people on earth...or are they?

A well-crafted/well-engineered/well-designed piece of equipment or human creation is something to behold. It's timeless.

When we visited the National Air and Space Museum at Washington DC several years ago, i was standing in front of the Lockheed SR71 Blackbird and couldn't move for like 30 minutes, just staring at that thing, completely lost in my fantasy...you call that nostalgia? So be it! :D

Our children today need to be taught to appreciate fine workmanship and artwork. If we don't, we are doing them a great disservice.

Vintage or not, I just like stuff that are well made, and looked good to boot!

[d_douglas]

Totally agreed, Weisan. I have a design background and love great design from the 30-50s. If I have the cash to design my own house from the ground up, , I would use many elements of early Modernism, , just as was used in Germany and Scandinavia back then. However, I would want it to be of the latest, greatest technologies and materials.

I compare that to a Speedvagen - they took what was great about a Cinelli and others, them made it there own. And yes, I think it is better in every way, though my old Supercorsa is a design classic.



Nostalgia is a good thing. Memories of the past and dreams of the future give meaning to the present.

Better in every way...really? Depends on what metrics you use.

If money is the barometer of happiness, then obviously the rich and the famous are the happiest people on earth...or are they?

A well-crafted/well-engineered/well-designed piece of equipment or human creation is something to behold. It's timeless.

When we visited the National Air and Space Museum at Washington DC several years ago, i was standing in front of the Lockheed SR71 Blackbird and couldn't move for like 30 minutes, just staring at that thing, completely lost in my fantasy...you call that nostalgia? So be it! :D

Our children today need to be taught to appreciate fine workmanship and artwork. If we don't, we are doing them a great disservice.

Vintage or not, I just like stuff that are well made, and looked good to boot!

[Ralph]

My main point is.... generally speaking.....best fine art in frame building, good workmanship, craftsmanship, well made and good looking, etc.....is being done now.

[weisan]

And my point is, they were "done" in the past as well. :D

http://www.drodd.com/images13/michelangelo-paintings13.jpg

[wallymann]

My main point is.... generally speaking.....best fine art in frame building, good workmanship, craftsmanship, well made and good looking, etc.....is being done now.

"best" is in the eye of the beholder or at least very dependent on the criteria for what underpins inspiration. ask 3 cyclist, get 4 opinions.

from a technical perspective today's builders benefit from advances in fabrication methods, metallurgy, and have learned from many very experienced trailblazers. aesthetically, many have access to great painters and some can even do inspired finish work by their own hand. but not many can claim to have fabricated a bike that's been ridden to victory in a Monument or grand tour. interestingly, of "modern" builders in steel pegoretti stands alone in that he can personally deliver high marks in all 3 categories...and sadly may be the last of the breed.

what's funny is that i love my 70s-80s steel, but top shelf racing kit from before then i have no taste for. i enjoy eyeballing and thinking what hard men the pros were to achieve so much on such old stuff, but have not desire to personally own or ride someting from the '60s or earlier. they just dont speak to me in the same way. on the other end, my appetite for "new" stuff stopped around 2008 -- all the guys locally bust my balls for not riding any carbon from the current decade!

[Ronsonic]

Yes, a 1970's or 1980's campy equipped road bike is just an old bike to some people. That's just life.

I do music electronics; life and business being what they are, we've been taking in a lot of older stereo receivers, and in the last few year consoles.

I have coworkers in that camp you describe "why not just get something modern." I very much get this. People working on things don't usually romanticize them. Makes it hard to monetize them.

Anyway, the same reasons apply in both fields. For some purposes the old thing is not in any significant way inferior to the modern version. If I just want to go ride some roads for 30 miles at a moderate intensity level my old steel mystery frame with the 1055, 7s group isn't worse than any other bike. Wanna turn up some jams while you clean house the old Sansui is fine.

OTOH, my 2016 entry level mountain bike really is better than my old sweetheart of 1999 XT bike was.

The old stuff has an aesthetic that won't be reproduced and a history that people might value and respect. And, for many people and purposes not worse in any way.

[SPOKE]

I have a pretty extensive collection that spans from 2016 back to about 1973. I tend to really dig lugged steel bikes. I also enjoy taking out an 80's paramount or cinelli one day then the next day grabbing my Sachs, Serotta CSI or Kirk from just a few years ago just to enjoy/appreciate the difference in how the vintages compare & contrast. I also get a kick out of the questions and comments about these steel bikes from the folks that have not been involved in the sport nearly as long as I have been.

[buddybikes]

Easy - during my prime (16 - 29 ) age, being strong and meeting the opposite sex. I wonder what happened to that pearl sky blue de Rosa...

[Mr. Pink]

The OP said "I have never wanted to do an Eroica styled ride", and I guess he meant the "style" part, but, I would love to do that ride, considering where it is, but not on some old thing, no, a nice, modern cross or fatty tire roadie that so many obsess over on this board. That's a hard ride, so, why punish yourself with an antique, attack it with the tight tool. Hell, a skinniesh tired light and minimal mtb with maybe, horror of horrors, a lockout suspension and comfy bars might be better. Life goes on and technology evolves. It's not as though those 60s and 70s steel racers talked about so much were the only bikes ever made. They're sort of sitting in the middle of bicycle history, a short period.
I used to own a real geeky audio system in the eighties. Tubes, electrostatic speakers, vinyl, you know. Now I send Spotify ten bucks a month and have a huge record store in the sky that I can play off my phone through a 100 dollar Bluetooth speaker, anywhere, anytime. I don't have to sit in just the perfect spot in the room to enjoy the new system. On a lark, I just drove a new Camaro out of a dealer, just the plain old (gulp) 4 cyl $30,000 model, and, you know, that thing blows away 90% of the "performance" cars of the 70s to early 80s that were engineered to make some turns between the 0-100 thing. Don't get me going about the Miata my girlfriend owns at 130,000 miles, which still runs so much better than anything British or Italian it is imitating, and she knows nothing about caring for it, she just drives it, all year long. You remember the horror of even brand new Triumphs, right? Lucas, God of Darkness. Sorry, life goes on.

[OtayBW]

Easy - during my prime (16 - 29 ) age, being strong and meeting the opposite sex. I wonder what happened to that pearl sky blue de Rosa...I own it and enjoy riding it now! :banana:

[Ken Robb]

I read the original post as a question about WHAT I like about old bikes not do I think they are better than new bikes so I'm a little surprised we have drifted to old vs. new overall.

[charliedid]

I read the original post as a question about WHAT I like about old bikes not do I think they are better than new bikes so I'm a little surprised we have drifted to old vs. new overall.

You are correct Ken. Ultimately I am interesting in the diverse opinions and reasons for people's interest in older bicycles.

I did however inject my own opinion regarding old vs new in setting up the question/inquiry.

I said:

"I don't believe in any sort of golden age, and generally think that modern bikes are better in virtually every way and much more enjoyable to ride. I know some feel similar but still hold dear some love for the old. If someone gave me a (insert brand name here) vintage bike in collector condition, I would turn right around and sell it. I'm not a collector..."

I did qualify that I thought modern bikes were "generally" better in every way. Obviously you can't deny certain advances in materials and construction but I understand that isn't the only qualifier for enjoying, owning and or riding bicycles. I'm as taken by aesthetics as the next person and we can't argue people's opinions in that regard.

[berserk87]

To me the bike is a tool for getting a workout. Cycling is also a sport for me. The social element is a nice side benefit but not the reason why I ride.

I did have a DeRosa I liked a long time ago - lugged steel with Campy 8 speed.

I hold a little nostalgia for certain bikes, but not a lot overall. I have owned a poopload of different bikes/frames over the years. I don't think that there are any "magic" bikes out there. There are differences, but they are all a means to an end. I get more enjoyment out of actually using them than not. I don't have a winter bike for that reason. I paid some decent coin for mine and I am going to ride it until it cries "uncle". That's what it is for.

Generally equipment has improved. I like Dura Ace 11speed just fine. Brake and shifting quality is nice.

I like the equipment I have now, and don't own anything "vintage" because I either sold the stuff I had when it was contemporary, or broke it. The closest thing to vintage I have is my TT bike (a spartan Fuji Aloha, about 15 years old, aluminum with carbon fork). I wouldn't mind buying something more aerodynamic.

In general, older or vintage bikes don't have a lot of appeal for me. I enjoy looking at the rigs that you folks post on this forum, but that's where it ends. I just don't have a use for an older or vintage bike.

[unterhausen]

I remember the first panto'ed Colnago** I saw when I was 16. An otherworldly light shone down on it and I'm pretty sure I heard angels singing. I've ridden 10's of thousands of miles since then, and I really want a bike that will not let me down, and those old bikes aren't fully up to the task. Partially that is because the industry has decided that random obsolescence is the way to go.

My racing bike from 1980 is still around, albeit in parts. The frame needs a paint job. That was a really nice bike, Super Record, Columbus SL, Criterium Setas, a paint job that had the durability of chicklets. I kinda wished that it had more chrome, but I was not willing to pay extra for that, it wasn't practical. I rode it for 30 years, it was a great bike.

**The Colnago died an ignominious death. A pile of bike lockers was leaning on the other side of the van, and fell on it when someone went around a turn a little too aggressively.

The people with nostalgia that I have trouble understanding are those that love old Varsitys. My back has never recovered from lifting those damn things. And they never worked very well. I just like saying that because someone will come along and defend them. They walk among us.

[fogrider]

I too don't believe there was a golden age of cycling...that said, there are bright stars that shined...there are still many great builders working a torch today. I believe the golden age of cycling is when one is still fit enough to ride and have enough funds to ride what they want.

A name that most younger riders will not know is Ron Cooper. In my youth, I saw a Ron Cooper hanging in a local shop, and the those in the know spoke of how great the ride was. Many years later, I saw one listed on Craigslist. There was not a photo, and it had been converted into a fixie. The bike was certainly not what I expected. There were no lugs or the typical RON COOPER lettering, and it had been rattle canned black. The only identifying thing was a "C" in a diamond. The price was right and after meeting with him, and a test ride, I bought it. Even as a fixie, it rode well. But I was not looking for a fixie.

The first thing I did was to tear it down and in the basement it sat for months. The original fork was gone and replaced with something cheap and heavy. I sold off many of the fixie parts and was in the hunt for a fork. The frame weight a little more than 4.6 pounds and I was in no rush to build it. My main ride was a scandium Rock Lobster with carbon tubulars, so the idea of heavy frame was not a big draw. So months passed, and I did find a 1" carbon fork and with parts I had, it was up and running with downtube shifters but it was very much ridable. Right away, the ride felt good. And it climbed amazingly well. it felt stiff and smooth. the bike was responsive and stable. I rode it on rolling course and it did everything well.

I'm not a collector, and I ride my bikes. And with the technology and lightweight parts we have today, I figured I could build a bike that very ridable. I rode around for eight months with is with downtube shifters and it was a blast. With the modern shifters, front and rear mechs, wheels, and lightweight bits, functionally, it works as well as anything out there today and I really enjoy riding it.

I finally talked to Tony at the Bicycle Odyssey and he found a few to pick from...they were all built by Ron Cooper. I worked with Allan Wanta and here are the results: https://www.flickr.com/cameraroll

[d_douglas]

The people with nostalgia that I have trouble understanding are those that love old Varsitys. My back has never recovered from lifting those damn things. And they never worked very well. I just like saying that because someone will come along and defend them. They walk among us.

I equate this to a love for a period of time in their lives VS the quality of a bike. I fell victim to this. I started 'real' cycling after buying a Bridgestone MB2, not realizing how bad the geometry was for the terrain I was trying to ride. I eventually bought a Rocky Mountain and felt that this was the pinnacle of high tech and owned this thing for about 20yrs, rarely riding because I preferred road.

I switched to 29er because it was cool and dug the wheel size, so have stayed with it. I ended up buying a modern slack geometry hardtail (chromag) and it has made me wonder how I rode stuff 20 yrs ago - it is so well thought out and easier to ride scary stuff that I think I was blinded by my love for my old steel Rocky.

On topic, i would love a modern interpretation of a lugged classic - namely a Kirk. They're lovely looking, and figure they'd be miles nicer than a vintage bike but with the similar luggy, pointy aesthetic. Artisans like Ellis, Winter, Sachs and a few others would be up to the task

[oldpotatoe]

I've been riding bikes all my life and have worked in the industry off and on for 25 or so years, with some connection to european road racing bikes and their history here in the USA.

In 1976 I went from being a BMX wanna-be to riding a road bike around lake michigan with 80 other kids and did a similar trip with a different route the next summer. I've done a bit of casual Mtn Bike racing and a few "gravel" events but was never a bike racer. I'n done some longer tours as an adult (month's long) and ridden in numerous countries. I've also been a (mostly) year round commuter to closing in on 30 years.

I've owned too many bikes (some fancy, some not) to remember and at times have run across a model of bike either at work or on the street that I had completely forgotten about owning. I tend to lose interest in them, find some fault or simply want to try a new bike out. I currently have only three bikes, which to many a non-cyclist is understandably two too many. Often at work, someone walks in with a bike and seems almost upset when we don't stop and inquire and generally gush about it. So many times it's just an old bike that will cost more than the owner wants to spend for us to work on. Yes, a 1970's or 1980's campy equipped road bike is just an old bike to some people. That's just life. That said, we are non-judgemental and will treat you and your bike with respect and care like any other. We want to know the history and what you have in mind. We are eager and willing to help, within reason.

I know many here enthusiastically enjoy older/vintage bikes and many conversations revolve around them either as having been recently purchased, refurbished or as a PSA in the Classifieds. Some of you are collectors with a vast number and I assume some simply never sell a bike after being purchased so end up accumulating. Often with hobbies people get into something and then seek to learn the history of it and bikes are by no means unique, Just take cameras and stereo equipment not to mention watches as examples. Minus the occasional bike I run across, I don't have a nostalgic/romantic streak in me when it comes to older bikes and I have never wanted to do an Eroica styled ride.

I don't believe in any sort of golden age, and generally think that modern bikes are better in virtually every way and much more enjoyable to ride. I know some feel similar but still hold dear some love for the old. If someone gave me a (insert brand name here) vintage bike in collector condition, I would turn right around and sell it. I'm not a collector...

So, for those of you that get excited by older bikes, what is the appeal? Is it personal attachment to a long help possession? Is it wanting to connect to the past in some meaningful way in order to make sense of the present? Are you simply fond of the styling and perceived quality of older bikes? or is it something entirely different? Does it stop with bikes, or does it carry through in other interests?

I look forward to hearing your stories.

Pretty simple really. Kinda like this. it's fun..

[oldpotatoe]

You are correct Ken. Ultimately I am interesting in the diverse opinions and reasons for people's interest in older bicycles.

I did however inject my own opinion regarding old vs new in setting up the question/inquiry.

I said:

"I don't believe in any sort of golden age, and generally think that modern bikes are better in virtually every way and much more enjoyable to ride. I know some feel similar but still hold dear some love for the old. If someone gave me a (insert brand name here) vintage bike in collector condition, I would turn right around and sell it. I'm not a collector..."

I did qualify that I thought modern bikes were "generally" better in every way. Obviously you can't deny certain advances in materials and construction but I understand that isn't the only qualifier for enjoying, owning and or riding bicycles. I'm as taken by aesthetics as the next person and we can't argue people's opinions in that regard.

Subjective. My 1990 MXLeader is a better riding bike than any bike I have owned in 32 years. Except my 1985 Ciocc and mid 2000 Mondonico(which broke..the only bike frame I have ever owned that broke). I have owned carbon and aluminum also, own 2 Moots now.

Modern bikes are lighter, modern bikes have benefited from design/geometry advances, construction advances. BUT my Merckx disappears beneath me, makes it easy to enjoy the ride, the object, afterall.

[smontanaro]

... golden age of cycling ...

There was, and it is still going on. If you look at some of the truly beautiful frames being produced in small numbers today, much of it is being doing in steel. Think Mark Dinucci (http://www.dinuccicycles.com/), Chris Kvale (http://www.chriskvalecycles.com/), Richard Sachs (http://www.richardsachs.com/), Dave Wages (http://www.elliscycles.com/). Steel is an easily worked material which lends itself to artistic creativity. (In fact, the fragment of text on Richard Sachs's front page is emblematic of the approach of many of the best builders.)

Read some of Dave Moulton's blog posts. In addition to being a now retired master framebuilder himself (Dave Moulton, Fuso, a stint at Masi USA), he raced in the 50s and writes pretty well too. One of his blog posts (http://davesbikeblog.squarespace.com/blog/2009/4/23/a-100-year-legacy.html) in particular, draws a pretty straight line between the earliest days of bicycle manufacture and the present. I'm sure that connection from Pop Hodge to Dave Moulton, to Russ Denny, all building with steel, exists for almost every other builder out there today. And, it's approachable for all who care to spend the time. You can take well-regarded framebuilding classes from UBI, Doug Fattic, and (I'm sure) others. Chances are, your first frame will be made of steel, quite possibly lugged, brazed, not welded.

So, yes, there is some nostalgia for those of us who ride older bikes. But there is a connection from the earliest days of cycling which is present in every steel bike out there.

Finally, this thread really needs some pictures. In no particular order, some stuff I dredged up on Flickr.

https://c5.staticflickr.com/6/5584/14795786740_39468c7a10_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/oxsgVo)Vagner Transformation (https://flic.kr/p/oxsgVo) by Mark DiNucci (https://www.flickr.com/photos/dinuccicycles/), on Flickr

https://c4.staticflickr.com/2/1275/4682297947_a536291dfe_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/88L13X)Brian Baylis (https://flic.kr/p/88L13X) by Citizen Chain (https://www.flickr.com/photos/citizenchaincyclery/), on Flickr

https://c8.staticflickr.com/9/8263/8654563935_ae090b13bb_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/ebLUkz)P1670663 (https://flic.kr/p/ebLUkz) by ktk17028 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/40402003@N05/), on Flickr

https://c3.staticflickr.com/6/5519/9718053442_9abc89e8b9_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/fNKyHy)IMG_6858 (https://flic.kr/p/fNKyHy) by Jamie Swan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/48950170@N03/), on Flickr

[providence]

As someone who owns nothing but vintage steel, some with modern components and others equipped as they were on the floor...

A lot has to do with aesthetics. I don't race, I don't often do group rides, and I don't often ride with friends. My riding routine consists of getting home from work or waking up on a weekend, walking into the bike room, and grabbing whichever one makes me smile that day. I leave my phone at home and don't use any computers to track what I've done that day. I just get lost in the ride, bike, and scenery. I get home when I get home.

Bikes, especially at the higher end across any year, are very much tools. Modern examples are extracting every advantage they can and that's fine for some who are seeking that out. But that's not why I ride.

[bikinchris]

Nostalgia!

Same reason people buy old cars. They might not start on any given day, they need lots more maintenance, (changing points, condenser and plugs often) they handle poorly, stop worse and are a real chore to drive compared to new cars, but we love them.

[bigbill]

New bikes are lighter and can be stiffer, I get that. I've got vintage bikes but I also have some more contemporary metal bikes. Most of my miles this last year were on the Big Leg Emma which is still made but mine is 11 years old now. It got new paint and FD braze-on two years ago, but it is essentially the same bike as it was in 2006, same Reynolds fork and all. I also have a Ti Serotta that I picked up here last summer. Both bikes ride and fit me well. I haven't felt like the weight of either bike has held me back. I'm just under 6'2", if I was 165 pounds I would be concerned about weight. Even at the peak of my racing in the mid 90's, I was still a little over 180#.

The bike is a tool for enjoyment and I enjoy what I have.

[d_douglas]

Nostalgia!

Same reason people buy old cars. They might not start on any given day, they need lots more maintenance, (changing points, condenser and plugs often) they handle poorly, stop worse and are a real chore to drive compared to new cars, but we love them.

Yes, agreed. I would take a Corolla any day over a 1968 Ford whatever. But cars are truly tools to me. I own two old, beaten up Japanese cars that start every time and transport my family safely, so they've met their goal.

I would love to own a 2017 Subaru to replace my 2004, but I don't place it as a priority. Wait, I guess in car terms, my Forester is a vintage car?!?!

[d_douglas]

PS those images of lugged fork crowns and seat clusters make me smile - after all I've said, they are really beautiful...

[daker13]

As a more general question of old vs. new, etc... Companies are profit-driven, and develop new technologies in order to sell more product; at the same time, they need to constantly streamline their production (automate, use cheaper materials, outsource for cheaper labor) in order to maximize this same profit. Anyone who collects vinyl records can see this in action: in the 15 years from Hank Mobley to Michael Jackson, the vinyl record became a flimsy, bendy thing with laughable quality control. Even between the first and second issue of the SAME RECORD (i.e., when a lp is popular enough to demand a second production run), there are obvious corners cut in the material quality of that record: covers have lesser quality inks, no 'extras' included with the album, cheaper vinyl, etc.

Where you draw the line is very personal. I myself like records and vintage (though not finicky) stereos and generally European frames, but as for cars, I drive a Subaru... I don't really care about them (yet?).

I understand that China and other eastern countries have tremendous productive capacity and in many cases their products are far superior (on every level) to those produced in the west. I am very happy with my BMC monster cross (I understand Mike Varney works closely with the factory to get the qc he does). But, imho, the big modern companies that the OP speaks of do not produce what I want when it comes to bicycles, and I take it as axiomatic that, over time, they will constantly seek to compromise manufacturing quality (often by balancing it with supposed technological 'advancements') in order to generate profit. So that's one of the reasons I ride a vintage steel frame (until I go custom).

[Repack Rider]

The second golden age of bicycling was roughly 1983-1990, mountain biking before hydraulics.

I see people on 30-year old Rockhoppers, a cheap bike on the day it was new, but built on such a rugged, simple design that even a cheap one is still useful decades later. My "town bike" is a 20+ y.o. Ritchey P-21.

I now ride a mountain bike that retails for $6000. It is such a complicated machine that it will not be useful in 30 years, but as long as the owner oils the chain, that Rockhopper will be.

Old bikes that have survived are clearly rugged. New bikes require so much maintenance that they have shorter useful lives, and the cost of lighter bikes is reduced durability. I got over 30 years out of my 1971 Colnago. Will you get that kind of life from you new carbon frame?

[smontanaro]

Same reason people buy old cars. They might not start on any given day, they need lots more maintenance, (changing points, condenser and plugs often) they handle poorly, stop worse and are a real chore to drive compared to new cars, but we love them.

Of course, none of the drawbacks of old cars need apply to old bikes, though the motors are getting rather balky. 😀

[jr59]

I like older vintage bikes. I like newer steel bikes. Heck I even like some carbon bikes. I guess I just like bikes. :banana: I ride mostly steel bikes these days. For the ride comfort and an excuse when I'm slow,( most of the time), hey, I'm on a steel bike!:help:

I understand what the poster means though. I get that way with watches some times. Oh it's just a lowly Rolex, yawn. I try not to do such, but I do.

[weisan]

http://www.flandriacafe.com/2011/12/will-real-one-percent-please-stand-up.html

[choke]

I also don't really get why the new carbon bikes are so "impersonal" and so on. Sure there's a lot of machinery involved and it's usually a team effort instead of a solo craftsperson. But there's a *lot* of effort goes into making those. Not to mention all the labour and love invested by the designers and engineers. Doesn't that count for anything?I can appreciate the technology and the work behind the scenes, but they just don't give me the same feeling as a steel bike.

I recently watched a documentary on Netflix, "Apex: The Story of the Hypercar". It was pretty interesting and showcased some amazing autos.....Ferrari, McLaren and Koenigsegg. Performance wise those cars are on a totally different plane from anything else, yet in the end I felt more or less the same about them as I do about carbon bikes - they just didn't make me smile inside like many older cars do. I'd much rather look at....and own....a Lotus Europa, Alvis 12/50 Ducksback or any number of autos that have nowhere near the technology and performance of those hypercars. Those older cars "speak" to me whereas the new ones don't.

[weisan]

What's the appeal of older vintage bikes, you ask?

I dunno...you have to ask her!

:D

:banana:


http://bikecatalogs.org/SCHWINN/1973/Catalog/FULL/1973_10.jpg

[charliedid]

Anybody still ride road bikes from the 50's or 60's?

[charliedid]

Nostalgia!

Same reason people buy old cars. They might not start on any given day, they need lots more maintenance, (changing points, condenser and plugs often) they handle poorly, stop worse and are a real chore to drive compared to new cars, but we love them.

That is one of the interesting things. Some people love them despite their faults and some people don't care for them because of their faults.

[weisan]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXSHpj74Ksk

[OtayBW]

That is one of the interesting things. Some people love them despite their faults and some people don't care for them because of their faults.And why does there have to be faults?

[classtimesailer]

Older/vintage bikes, or bikes made like those bikes with modern tubesets look cool and that makes them fun to ride. Also, it is very easy for a home mechanic to keep a vintage bike working dependably and SMOOTHLY. There is only the usual chains, cogs, brake blocks to replace. The new stuff is very finicky. I spend most of my time on the bike pedaling. The new bikes don't pedal any better. I test drove a latest/greatest and was going to ask my wife if I could take advantage of the killer club deal and get one of them. Then I got on my 1981 Medici to go home. I recreated my test course and realized there was no difference to me. The fact that there is no difference to me also makes the old machines really cool.

[bikinchris]

And why does there have to be faults?

There doesn't have to be faults. The older bike do handle nice as long as it fits well. But the brakes on the older bikes are just not very good. Even if you mount modern pads on them. The friction shifting is great as long as you don't need to shift under hard pedaling, If you buy an older bike, you need to schedule several hours for a complete overhaul.

The newer bikes of today will be older one day and need new everything on them.

[fogrider]

at any given time, there are those that mastered their craft and excelled. your reference to Dave Moulton is an example of a master builder that decides to hang it up and move on. sure long point lugs and double fork crowns have an aesthetic appeal for some but is there any performance advantage? I agree that advances today brings bikes that ride and work better than what was available in years past. Image if air hardened steel was available when Dave Moulton was building.

Today ti frames are going for crazy money and carbon fiber is affordable to anyone that wants it. And yes, there are plenty of guys making a good living selling steel. Today, we have 11 speeds, electronic shifting, disc brakes and tubeless tires, so yes we can say that we are currently in the golden age. But we can say that about any time in the past, I don't think there was a time in the past that though everything we have available was crap.

Everyone was in awe when Columbus came out with SL tubing, then welding large aluminum tubes were the hot ticket. Then came ti and carbon. Same with components. And every year, we learn to improve on what was done before. but if every year is better than the next, can we really say there is a golden age?

There was, and it is still going on. If you look at some of the truly beautiful frames being produced in small numbers today, much of it is being doing in steel. Think Mark Dinucci (http://www.dinuccicycles.com/), Chris Kvale (http://www.chriskvalecycles.com/), Richard Sachs (http://www.richardsachs.com/), Dave Wages (http://www.elliscycles.com/). Steel is an easily worked material which lends itself to artistic creativity. (In fact, the fragment of text on Richard Sachs's front page is emblematic of the approach of many of the best builders.)

Read some of Dave Moulton's blog posts. In addition to being a now retired master framebuilder himself (Dave Moulton, Fuso, a stint at Masi USA), he raced in the 50s and writes pretty well too. One of his blog posts (http://davesbikeblog.squarespace.com/blog/2009/4/23/a-100-year-legacy.html) in particular, draws a pretty straight line between the earliest days of bicycle manufacture and the present. I'm sure that connection from Pop Hodge to Dave Moulton, to Russ Denny, all building with steel, exists for almost every other builder out there today. And, it's approachable for all who care to spend the time. You can take well-regarded framebuilding classes from UBI, Doug Fattic, and (I'm sure) others. Chances are, your first frame will be made of steel, quite possibly lugged, brazed, not welded.

So, yes, there is some nostalgia for those of us who ride older bikes. But there is a connection from the earliest days of cycling which is present in every steel bike out there.

Finally, this thread really needs some pictures. In no particular order, some stuff I dredged up on Flickr.

https://c5.staticflickr.com/6/5584/14795786740_39468c7a10_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/oxsgVo)Vagner Transformation (https://flic.kr/p/oxsgVo) by Mark DiNucci (https://www.flickr.com/photos/dinuccicycles/), on Flickr

https://c4.staticflickr.com/2/1275/4682297947_a536291dfe_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/88L13X)Brian Baylis (https://flic.kr/p/88L13X) by Citizen Chain (https://www.flickr.com/photos/citizenchaincyclery/), on Flickr

https://c8.staticflickr.com/9/8263/8654563935_ae090b13bb_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/ebLUkz)P1670663 (https://flic.kr/p/ebLUkz) by ktk17028 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/40402003@N05/), on Flickr

https://c3.staticflickr.com/6/5519/9718053442_9abc89e8b9_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/fNKyHy)IMG_6858 (https://flic.kr/p/fNKyHy) by Jamie Swan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/48950170@N03/), on Flickr

[Seramount]

IMG]http://bikecatalogs.org/SCHWINN/1973/Catalog/FULL/1973_10.jpg[/IMG]

nice cycling kit...***?

[Polyglot]

I have bikes dating back to the 30's, as well as from every decade in between. I also have a custom-built Crumpton frame that I built up as a super bike with all the latest do-dads in 2016. The Crumpton is without doubt the best performing bike that I have and the one that I ride when going out on fast tides, BUT, I also get just as much satisfaction riding any one of my other bikes when speed is not the ultimate goal of the ride. My to most "comfortable" bikes are both bikes built in the 80's. I rode one of them today here in New Jersey on a New Year's day ride with the local club: a 1988 De Rosa 35th anniversary.

When coasting in the descents, I was able to drop absolutely everybody, in part because of my personal gravitational enhancement, in part because of the sublime handling, in part because of experience and comfort in descending and in part because I have some very good tires fitted to the bike. On the flats, I was likewise able to keep up with the pace line without any difficulties. The only real disadvantages came in the shifting and braking, but then we are comparing what was cutting edge and top of the line 30 years ago, with a price to match, to bikes that retail form the most part in the $3-5K range (better than average but far from top of the line). If instead you compared an average bike from the 80's against a likewise positioned bike of today, you would find that the difference is greater.

I think that the most overwhelming reason why C&V'ers are attracted to vintage bikes is the absolute cheapness of the bikes. You can buy what was a top of the line bikes a few decades ago for a fraction of a mid-range new bike and it will not depreciate at all with at least minimal maintenance.

[OtayBW]

There doesn't have to be faults. The older bike do handle nice as long as it fits well. But the brakes on the older bikes are just not very good. Even if you mount modern pads on them. The friction shifting is great as long as you don't need to shift under hard pedaling, If you buy an older bike, you need to schedule several hours for a complete overhaul.

The newer bikes of today will be older one day and need new everything on them.
Of all the great and desirable older/vintage frames out there, I sure don't know too many folks who run them with OEM equipment. So, I think in most cases, the appeal is in the riding, not so much the collecting, per se (maybe a little of both), and as a result, most folks build them to use. My bikes ride just fine and stop very well, I'm quite sure better than a lot of modern production offerings.

The only fault is in the eye of the beholder.

[charliedid]

And why does there have to be faults?

Nothing is perfect.

[charliedid]

I have bikes dating back to the 30's, as well as from every decade in between. I also have a custom-built Crumpton frame that I built up as a super bike with all the latest do-dads in 2016. The Crumpton is without doubt the best performing bike that I have and the one that I ride when going out on fast tides, BUT, I also get just as much satisfaction riding any one of my other bikes when speed is not the ultimate goal of the ride. My to most "comfortable" bikes are both bikes built in the 80's. I rode one of them today here in New Jersey on a New Year's day ride with the local club: a 1988 De Rosa 35th anniversary.

When coasting in the descents, I was able to drop absolutely everybody, in part because of my personal gravitational enhancement, in part because of the sublime handling, in part because of experience and comfort in descending and in part because I have some very good tires fitted to the bike. On the flats, I was likewise able to keep up with the pace line without any difficulties. The only real disadvantages came in the shifting and braking, but then we are comparing what was cutting edge and top of the line 30 years ago, with a price to match, to bikes that retail form the most part in the $3-5K range (better than average but far from top of the line). If instead you compared an average bike from the 80's against a likewise positioned bike of today, you would find that the difference is greater.

I think that the most overwhelming reason why C&V'ers are attracted to vintage bikes is the absolute cheapness of the bikes. You can buy what was a top of the line bikes a few decades ago for a fraction of a mid-range new bike and it will not depreciate at all with at least minimal maintenance.

You make some very valid points here.

Taken a different way, when comparing older bikes to new bikes as purpose built machines the differences can be rather stark. For example, the power transfer and shifting performance of racing bikes or the load carrying ability and weight savings of modern vs older touring bikes. Taken for a simple bike ride on a Sunday afternoon vs intended purpose the differences can become rather blurred.

Edit: I think that is also very true are when comparing motorcycles or cars in a similar fashion.

[charliedid]

Of all the great and desirable older/vintage frames out there, I sure don't know too many folks who run them with OEM equipment. So, I think in most cases, the appeal is in the riding, not so much the collecting, per se (maybe a little of both), and as a result, most folks build them to use. My bikes ride just fine and stop very well, I'm quite sure better than a lot of modern production offerings.

The only fault is in the eye of the beholder.

So the fault in your opinion is more in the components than the frame?

[OtayBW]

So the fault in your opinion is more in the components than the frame?
I think we are on different wavelengths here....

[charliedid]

I think we are on different wavelengths here....

Maybe

I was referring to this "I sure don't know too many folks who run them with OEM equipment"

I read that as, older frames are fine as long as you hang modern parts on them.

What's your wavelength?

[wallymann]

That's a hard ride, so, why punish yourself with an antique...

eroica...that's kinda the point, yes?

[oliver1850]

Of all the great and desirable older/vintage frames out there, I sure don't know too many folks who run them with OEM equipment. So, I think in most cases, the appeal is in the riding, not so much the collecting, per se (maybe a little of both), and as a result, most folks build them to use. My bikes ride just fine and stop very well, I'm quite sure better than a lot of modern production offerings.

The only fault is in the eye of the beholder.

I try to build bikes to original spec when I can. I'm currently looking for a Coda 1000 saddle for a 1998 Silk Road. Even if I don't like to ride it I'll keep it on the bike.

[classtimesailer]

A top of the line bike from a few decades ago in like new condition will not be cheap. Find a Colnago Super, Bianchi Superissimo, or Masi Gran Criterium in mint condition and the price will rival a contemporary pro bike. Depreciation only enters the equation when you try to rationalize n+1 to your spouse.


I think that the most overwhelming reason why C&V'ers are attracted to vintage bikes is the absolute cheapness of the bikes. You can buy what was a top of the line bikes a few decades ago for a fraction of a mid-range new bike and it will not depreciate at all with at least minimal maintenance.

[charliedid]

eroica...that's kinda the point, yes?

That is certainly one of the reasons people do it. Me, I'll take the ride, the food and the wool jersey but I want my newer bike with brakes that work. I'm fond of a hard ride and punishing conditions but...

[wallymann]

That is certainly one of the reasons people do it. Me, I'll take the ride, the food and the wool jersey but I want my newer bike with brakes that work. I'm fond of a hard ride and punishing conditions but...

yep, i get it. it's all relative to one's appetite and mindset.

i love old school performance cars and motorcycles, but i have no desire to deal with carburetors and shatty emissions. i need fuel injection and a functioning catalytic converter for any IC-powered conveyance that i own. but i have uncles that smell unburned hydrocarbon fumes and think all is right with the world.

for bikes, braking performance is a big downside of older stuff. but i live in the flatlands of michigan, so i can get away with it -- i cant imagine regularly doing serious descents out west using them!

https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/s480x480/13537683_10208788165253355_5638105820244554579_n.j pg?oh=99fbb0ec6fac09b4174ebaca1fa839b5&oe=58EC20D3 (https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/13497852_10208788165253355_5638105820244554579_o.j pg?oh=8a8d2a83d653be6e44674e21882ce22b&oe=58DC2B7D)

[charliedid]

yep, i get it. it's all relative to one's appetite and mindset.

i love old school performance cars and motorcycles, but i have no desire to deal with carburetors and shatty emissions. i need fuel injection and a functioning catalytic converter for any IC-powered conveyance that i own.

for bikes, braking performance is a big downside of older stuff. but i live in the flatlands of michigan, so i can get away with it -- i cant imagine regularly doing serious descents out west using them!

https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/s480x480/13537683_10208788165253355_5638105820244554579_n.j pg?oh=99fbb0ec6fac09b4174ebaca1fa839b5&oe=58EC20D3

Indeed,

I never raced road bikes and many of the people who I know well that did always laugh at me when it comes to breaking. Ever notice how many bike racers brakes barely engage? I'm too much of a chicken.

[martl]

collecting/restoring/riding vintage bikes is a hobby of mine. I like doing it. Looking for a deeper sense or justifiaction would be contraire to my definition of "a hobby".

Sometimes, though, experiencing what it is like riding a racing bike from the 80ies, 70ies, 60ies, even 30ies or 20ies helps distinguish between *real* technical progress and what marketing artists define as such.

[paredown]

....
I think that the most overwhelming reason why C&V'ers are attracted to vintage bikes is the absolute cheapness of the bikes. You can buy what was a top of the line bikes a few decades ago for a fraction of a mid-range new bike and it will not depreciate at all with at least minimal maintenance.
Agreed--and as a partial answer to the other post citing high prices of Colnagos-- if you are a 'bargain shopper', you need to step outside the circle of bikes that even the rookies know are "hot" bikes, and look for the road less traveled--excellent bikes by slightly less well known, but skilled builders--and indeed there are incredible bargains out there.

If I had more room, I would have some real bargain beauties.:hello:

While I would love to go to a custom builder and get a dream bike built, realistically it is not in the cards for me, so I will continue to pick up and try out bargains from the 80s/90s and try them on for size. The oldest bikes I raced were my Frejus track (late 60s) and my brother's Cinelli 'B' (also early '60s) but I have never really had the desire to pick up anything older than where I started. And I truly appreciate the improvements that came with O/S & newer tubing (even though I still get a kick out of my classic 531 Mercian) so those cool bikes from the 80s and 90s are where I end up.

I have to say that as a survivor of the "golden age"--I absolutely love modern equipment--and especially the better brakes of the modern era. But I agree with the other comment--when I was still racing, I didn't brake so much, so the Campagnolo Record 'slowing mechanisms" were good enough.

[MerckxMad]

While I do love the looks of a skinny tubed steel bike with chromed parts, my decision to choose classic steel was driven more by practicality than anything else. After my back was broken by a car driven into me, I could no longer comfortably ride the many carbon wonder bikes hanging in my garage. The Aheadset eliminated the ability to get the bars up into a comfortable position regardless of spacers and flipping stems. The beautifully simplistic quill stem with its seemingly endless range of flexibility allowed by to return to the joy of riding. Instead of being limited by stupidly short head tubes and stupidly long seatposts used on modern "compact" frames, I could adjust the bars and seat height with an Allen wrench and be on my way in comfort.

I don't know about "planing" but I do sense that my steel, lugged frames, flex a bit and make pedaling with effort just a bit more comfortable.

In addition, I have 20+ year old square taper BBs that spin like the day the were made; no BB30, outboard bearings, PF whatevers, put on a set of quality cranks and forget it. I have even gone back to DT shifters: one lever, one cable, positive shifts every time.

Having gone back in time, I'm not sure that I benefitted from any advancement in cycling design since the clipless pedal.

[Mr. Pink]

eroica...that's kinda the point, yes?

Is it? I thought it was a celebration of the strada bianche and a way to preserve them, and also an excuse for many to travel hundreds and thousands of miles to a very beautiful place with amazing food and wear cool old clothing while enjoying the general party atmosphere for a weekend. The suffering part, I don't know, maybe there are a lot into that, but, not me. I'll stay home and whip myself in a cold shower standing on sharp gravel for a lot less money spent.

You know, you can do that ride anytime you want. It's well marked. No food stops or party, but, you can figure that out. The food part, I mean.

[texbike]

I have bikes dating back to the 30's, as well as from every decade in between. I also have a custom-built Crumpton frame that I built up as a super bike with all the latest do-dads in 2016. The Crumpton is without doubt the best performing bike that I have and the one that I ride when going out on fast tides, BUT, I also get just as much satisfaction riding any one of my other bikes when speed is not the ultimate goal of the ride. My to most "comfortable" bikes are both bikes built in the 80's.

I think that the most overwhelming reason why C&V'ers are attracted to vintage bikes is the absolute cheapness of the bikes. You can buy what was a top of the line bikes a few decades ago for a fraction of a mid-range new bike and it will not depreciate at all with at least minimal maintenance.



for bikes, braking performance is a big downside of older stuff. i cant imagine regularly doing serious descents out west using them!



While I do love the looks of a skinny tubed steel bike with chromed parts, my decision to choose classic steel was driven more by practicality than anything else.

In addition, I have 20+ year old square taper BBs that spin like the day the were made; no BB30, outboard bearings, PF whatevers, put on a set of quality cranks and forget it. I have even gone back to DT shifters: one lever, one cable, positive shifts every time.

Having gone back in time, I'm not sure that I benefitted from any advancement in cycling design since the clipless pedal.

These are all great points. I'm in the process of selling on a number of my classic steel bikes. However, 2 of the 3 that I plan to keep have 7400 series Dura Ace on them with DT shifters. The stuff just works. The brakes do leave a bit to be desired, but the Merckx that I'm keeping has been ridden down a multitude of steep descents in France, Spain, and Italy with single-pivot 7400 brakes. They're nowhere near as powerful as modern brakes, but they definitely work and were more than adequate for those descents.

I have several modern bikes, but I wouldn't be crushed if I were to only be left with either of the two steel vintage bikes. They both ride as well as my newer stuff and as MerckxMad points out above, they use simple technologies that are incredibly reliable and just work.

Texbike

[El Chaba]

Some people experienced it back in the day first hand and others have discovered it more recently...the fact that people actually rode bikes, competed on them, enjoyed them, etc. BEFORE indexed shifting, electronic shifting, disc brakes, carbon this that and the other... the industry tends to push a narrative that all of these doodads are essential to the cycling experience. I don't consider myself a retrogrouch and have carbon bikes, etc.....but there is something particularly satisfying about a good hard ride on a vintage bike and having a great time. It's very satisfying to disprove the false narrative put forth by the new for the sake of new segment of the industry.

[smontanaro]

http://www.flandriacafe.com/2011/12/will-real-one-percent-please-stand-up.html

+1.

[pdxharth]

I won't reiterate what so many others wrote about so elequently - aesthetics, nostalgia, lugs, shiny bits, etc - but I grew up in the late 70's and early 80's lusting after those thin-tubed beauties and it stuck with me, too. In the same way, I lusted after early Mustangs and Porsches, and sometimes still do, but those itches will forever go unscratched.

It wasn't until the early 90s that I became a full-fledged cyclist, however. It began with mountain bikes but my time quickly balanced out on the road, too.

That time period - early to mid to late 90s - was rife with change in the road cycling world, especially regarding aesthetics. We saw Indurain win on a beautiful lugged Pinarello but the trend was towards aluminum and big, oversized welds, chunky stems, graceless forks, and fat tubes. The aesthetics of mtb had overcome the road world and it was easy to push back. I, and obviously others, lamented the styles of the recent past and the beauty and gracefulness that had been lost with the new materials and designs of the present. Sticking with lugs and steel was my way of pushing back against that trend. That period forever cemented my love for the vintage stuff.

Moving forward, it seems style has shifted and the modern cycling world has embraced a new, cleaner aesthetic. It is one I find appealing, albeit slightly generic at times. It also coincides with wider tires (sometimes with tan sidewalls!) and other changes that make the newest generation of bikes very desirable to me in many ways.

As alluded to in other posts, similar changes have taken place in other industries as well, some of them based on aesthetics, some on function, and some just on the quality of manufacturing; the best are based on all three characteristics. I'm thinking of simple things like bread and beer, as well as things like cars and computers. There are many examples. As consumers, we are demanding more and getting it.

I love old bikes and vintage items in many categories. But I am starting to lust after some of the newer ones, too.

Great thread. Thanks to the OP.

[chismog]

Because this, for me:

https://c3.staticflickr.com/3/2865/11557138034_39bab8ea70_b.jpg

[bikingshearer]

Count me as one for whom it is almost entirely and unabashedly about the nostalgia. Lord knows it isn't about speed, because I have very little of that.

The bikes now in my regular rotation are all lugged steel (the newest frame is from 1986) and are from builders whose wares I lusted after and could not afford 40 years ago in my teens. These frames represent the look and feel I fell in love with so long ago. It doesn't hurt that, with the three I ride the most, the name on the frame is the name of the person who actually made it.

On the other hand, I am a firm devotee of Campy 10-speed components (in triple, please). Looks good on a vintage frame, and works like a charm (much better, in my view, than the period-correct stuff for my frames).

Bottom line, old, lugged steel frames make my soul happy in a way that aluminum, titanium and carbon fiber frames just don't.

None of this makes steel inherently better - just better for me. As with about a bazillion things in this life, YMMV.

[ultraman6970]

The fat old man in the picture looks like me... sits like me, hands position like me also hehe is not me obviously :D

I barely press the brakes either, but when i do, I do :P Brake pads last me centuries, never been able to actually worn a set of brake pads. Here is not super flat tho.



https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/s480x480/13537683_10208788165253355_5638105820244554579_n.j pg?oh=99fbb0ec6fac09b4174ebaca1fa839b5&oe=58EC20D3 (https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/13497852_10208788165253355_5638105820244554579_o.j pg?oh=8a8d2a83d653be6e44674e21882ce22b&oe=58DC2B7D)

[oldpotatoe]

Some people experienced it back in the day first hand and others have discovered it more recently...the fact that people actually rode bikes, competed on them, enjoyed them, etc. BEFORE indexed shifting, electronic shifting, disc brakes, carbon this that and the other... the industry tends to push a narrative that all of these doodads are essential to the cycling experience. I don't consider myself a retrogrouch and have carbon bikes, etc.....but there is something particularly satisfying about a good hard ride on a vintage bike and having a great time. It's very satisfying to disprove the false narrative put forth by the new for the sake of new segment of the industry.

Yup, I place all that stuff in the 'nice to have', sometimes, category but certainly not 'essential' in any way. Ahh, the industry..carbon, carbon, everywhere..cuz it's 'perfect'? Nope cuz it's cheap. Not really any true, 'bring people into cycling' innovation since clipless pedals and clicking, lever mounted shifting(and on MTBs first..the first UAV).

I'm just glad older stuff is still available, easy to find and even some brand new stuff for us 'freewheel' kinda guys.

[charliedid]

Because this, for me:

https://c3.staticflickr.com/3/2865/11557138034_39bab8ea70_b.jpg

Pretty,

Im intrigued....what is it?

[jtakeda]

I didn't read every single comment so excuse me if this has already been said,

But besides the aesthetic quality and craftsmanship of some bikes of the past, the main reason I ride vintage is ITS AFFORDABLE.

you can get a hand built frame for the price of some made in China stuff today. I can't afford all the hand builds of now, but I can afford the ones of yesteryear

[charliedid]

While I do love the looks of a skinny tubed steel bike with chromed parts, my decision to choose classic steel was driven more by practicality than anything else. After my back was broken by a car driven into me, I could no longer comfortably ride the many carbon wonder bikes hanging in my garage. The Aheadset eliminated the ability to get the bars up into a comfortable position regardless of spacers and flipping stems. The beautifully simplistic quill stem with its seemingly endless range of flexibility allowed by to return to the joy of riding. Instead of being limited by stupidly short head tubes and stupidly long seatposts used on modern "compact" frames, I could adjust the bars and seat height with an Allen wrench and be on my way in comfort.

I don't know about "planing" but I do sense that my steel, lugged frames, flex a bit and make pedaling with effort just a bit more comfortable.

In addition, I have 20+ year old square taper BBs that spin like the day the were made; no BB30, outboard bearings, PF whatevers, put on a set of quality cranks and forget it. I have even gone back to DT shifters: one lever, one cable, positive shifts every time.

Having gone back in time, I'm not sure that I benefitted from any advancement in cycling design since the clipless pedal.

Good read and I have little to argue with. The headset of course was not the limitation. The limitation of the carbon wonder bike's design is more apt. Quill stems (long enough) make setting up a bike (tweaking) much easier for the user or fitter as long as the cables will allow. We talk a lot about this at work and wish bikes came with more adjustability out of the box. We are capable of cutting steerer tubes and cables. Certainly makes it easier to sell and fit someone in a retail environment.

I too am a fan of Sq taper BB and still ride one. That said a GXP is the only other type I use and it has never been an issue and is really really simple.

My list is a bit longer than clipless pedals but they are right up there for me as well. The comfort thing is key to me and the industry is listening a bit when it comes to road bikes. Most people are not super fit bike racers.

[mtechnica]

I used to ride vintage road bikes because it was all I could afford. If you have $300 to spend on a road bike quality is tough to come by. Nowadays I can afford newer bikes but I still enjoy the vintage ones for their looks.

[Stevemikesteve]

my decision to choose classic steel was driven more by practicality than anything else.

Pretty much sums it up for me also. It's the head tube and the quill. I'm not fast so I'd rather have more flex everywhere possible. A 1 1/8 modern head tube is so beefy, just not something I need. I like the one inch and a quill is so much easier to get the bars up level with saddle height. For dirt riding on a road bike, skinnier steel does the trick for me. I'm on an old Miyata 1000LT with 700 x 38s and I love it.

[19wisconsin64]

A fellow forum member sold me two of his bikes. A pristine condition Davidson from the mid 1980's with Campagnolo parts, and a pristine condition Trek Domane with Shimano parts. Both bikes are sublime for different reasons.

If I want to go for a fast, long, hard ride the modern carbon fiber wonder-bikes of today are hands-down your go-to bike for going the fastest.

But, if you want to really enjoy your ride, and you have a nostalgic mindset for appreciating the metal artistry, the smooth ride, and the fact that every pedal turn takes you back to the day when Lemond and Hampsten (fill in the blank for any rider of the day when they rode steel in the pro peloton) were racing......... steel wins.

Modern carbon bikes won't hold their value in the long run...they are constantly being replaced by more gears, different shifting methods, different braking methods, different (fill in the blank). Heck, my 2015 perfect ride is now outdated, as the new models have not only rear road bike suspension integrated into the frame, but also front suspension and disc brakes. Wow.

Hey, it's all good! We live in a great time for cycling! Cheers

[steveoz]

hmmm interesting question - I guess the root cause of my bike "collecting" stems from growing up so frikn poor I couldn't get a bike...once I got a taste of road bikes a number of years ago (and could afford to buy them) it became a learning curve obsession - I just felt (feel) like I have to try every bike - ebay is now a curse (blessing?) I can try out a frame - and if I don't like it turn right around and put it back up and generally "break even" (even if I don't I just consider it "rental fee") I have kept a selection that probably won't ever let go..mostly Serotta's - they just seem to ride great, and even though I tried the classics- Colnago's, Merckx's, Pinarello and even a steel Bernard Hinault Look - the Serotta's are still my favorite.... I do agree; however, with the OP's assessment of drivetrain components! :beer: This new 11 speed Shimano just blows me away...made me sell every bit of my old Campy stuff

[charliedid]

hmmm interesting question - I guess the root cause of my bike "collecting" stems from growing up so frikn poor I couldn't get a bike...once I got a taste of road bikes a number of years ago (and could afford to buy them) it became a learning curve obsession - I just felt (feel) like I have to try every bike - ebay is now a curse (blessing?) I can try out a frame - and if I don't like it turn right around and put it back up and generally "break even" (even if I don't I just consider it "rental fee") I have kept a selection that probably won't ever let go..mostly Serotta's - they just seem to ride great, and even though I tried the classics- Colnago's, Merckx's, Pinarello and even a steel Bernard Hinault Look - the Serotta's are still my favorite.... I do agree; however, with the OP's assessment of drivetrain components! :beer: This new 11 speed Shimano just blows me away...made me sell every bit of my old Campy stuff

Interesting take:

Value/price of older frames seems to be a big draw for people.

I started this whole conversation about complete bikes (frames & Components) and how that differ and or have changed. As someone who tends to prefer modern steel, many of my bikes in the last 10-15 years fall into that sort of modern/classic camp.

Thanks

[TimW]

The latest and greatest will only be the latest and greatest for a year or two. A classic will be a classic forever

[Waldo]

Semi-tongue in cheek response to thread title: What kind of dumbass question is that?

[paedalas]

Has anyone seen the GCN vids concerning different era bikes?

[velomateo]

I'm drawn to vintage steel bikes the same way I'm attracted to an air-head BMW motorcycle, 70's Alfa Romeo, Heuer automatic or a clean old Gibson electric. I like the style of craftsmanship, things that were designed with a pencil and paper and then brought to life by skilled hands.
I love finding, and saving, old tired racers - long left to rot and rust. Getting them back in to service is very gratifying for me, and I have made a few bucks and grown my modest collection in the process.
I'm already signed up to ride the Eroica California, in April, and I'm very much looking forward to participating (and suffering) with other like minded folks.

[charliedid]

Semi-tongue in cheek response to thread title: What kind of dumbass question is that?

Tongue in cheek not a problem with me.

Excellent question BTW

[charliedid]

The latest and greatest will only be the latest and greatest for a year or two. A classic will be a classic forever

Nothing lasts forever.

[R3awak3n]

In the midst of selling my only vintage bike now (and knowing I will probably regret it), I love vintage bikes. First of they look better, they just do. No Carbon, fat alum tubed, disc bs, ect ect bike looks as good a nice level TT, thin tubed, rim brake, fist of seatpost, quill stem bike. They also have a ride quality that appeals to some. Is it better than a new bike? no. Is it worst than a new bike? no. It is just different. I really like it. I also love the history of the bike and that i has had many owners and its still here doing its thing.

[El Chaba]

While I appreciate nice cycling equipment whether new or vintage, there is one aspect from the past that I have never experienced with more modern equipment. That is, there was a certain feel from the chain that emanated from a nice new Sedisport chain on a Maillard 700 freewheel when pushing a nice tall gear at speed....very satisfying....

[weisan]

While I appreciate nice cycling equipment whether new or vintage, there is one aspect from the past that I have never experienced with more modern equipment. That is, there was a certain feel from the chain that emanated from a nice new Sedisport chain on a Maillard 700 freewheel when pushing a nice tall gear at speed....very satisfying....

Chaba pal , funny you should say that, I was just sitting there earlier turning the cranks on the Corsa Extra and noticing the solid and smooth feel of the interface between the cranks, the chain, the cassette, the derailleur and how they work together in unison to transfer power to the wheel and the hub. I kid you not, even though the bike and the components are more than 26 years old, there's something magical. I almost don't trust what I feel and had to go over and spin the cranks on my more up- to -date steel Serotta and my french carbon wunderbike...they just felt different, I can't really explain. I wonder whether something really good with regards to quality and workmanship was lost between when the Corsa was made (1990) and today's equipment....

[Duende]

I'm drawn to vintage steel bikes the same way I'm attracted to an air-head BMW motorcycle, 70's Alfa Romeo, Heuer automatic or a clean old Gibson electric. I like the style of craftsmanship, things that were designed with a pencil and paper and then brought to life by skilled hands.
I love finding, and saving, old tired racers - long left to rot and rust. Getting them back in to service is very gratifying for me, and I have made a few bucks and grown my modest collection in the process.
I'm already signed up to ride the Eroica California, in April, and I'm very much looking forward to participating (and suffering) with other like minded folks.

Ditto!

Maybe see you at Eroica this year. Not 100% yet I'm going to do it this year.. might do the Tour de Tucson instead.

But if you see a Dark Blue Ciocc running around... that's probably me. :)

[El Chaba]

Chaba pal , funny you should say that, I was just sitting there earlier turning the cranks on the Corsa Extra and noticing the solid and smooth feel of the interface between the cranks, the chain, the cassette, the derailleur and how they work together in unison to transfer power to the wheel and the hub. I kid you not, even though the bike and the components are more than 26 years old, there's something magical. I almost don't trust what I feel and had to go over and spin the cranks on my more up- to -date steel Serotta and my french carbon wunderbike...they just felt different, I can't really explain. I wonder whether something really good with regards to quality and workmanship was lost between when the Corsa was made (1990) and today's equipment....

It's sufficient reason on its own to warrant a vintage bike....the Merckx is great by the way. Others prefer the MXL, but I always liked the Corsa and Corsa Extra.....

[Vonruden]

For me it's the beauty and ride.
http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj533/vonruden1/4B7B5AC6-42BF-480B-A819-F8755038E03B_zpsvy8kvcoe.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/vonruden1/media/4B7B5AC6-42BF-480B-A819-F8755038E03B_zpsvy8kvcoe.jpg.html)

[velomateo]

Ditto!

Maybe see you at Eroica this year. Not 100% yet I'm going to do it this year.. might do the Tour de Tucson instead.

But if you see a Dark Blue Ciocc running around... that's probably me. :)

My friend will be on his beautiful white and chrome Ciocc, so if you see him I'll be the other guy on the light blue Serotta or red and chrome Scapin. Hope to see you there.

[weisan]

For me it's the beauty and ride.
http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj533/vonruden1/4B7B5AC6-42BF-480B-A819-F8755038E03B_zpsvy8kvcoe.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/vonruden1/media/4B7B5AC6-42BF-480B-A819-F8755038E03B_zpsvy8kvcoe.jpg.html)

wow! I never would have thought a picture of a saddle, seatpost and seat collar would be wallpaper worthy, but it is!!!

[EPOJoe]

Had a guy on a carbon wonder bike ask me once why I would ride a "bike like that", referring to one of my vintage steel beauties. I was dumbstruck. It was sort of like someone claiming that art had no value, and efficiency was the ultimate goal of life.
http://www.theaesthetics.com/assets/OLO1.jpg

[Saxon]

The top of the line beauties from the 70's/80's were my dream bikes growing up. I've owned more modern carbon race bikes and while they do perform better (I still ride most of my old bikes with period brakes, etc...) they're not a replacement, just different. I've gone into local bike shops recently thinking I may pick up a new bike, but I'm spiritually indifferent to the cookie cutter bikes.
http://www.theaesthetics.com/assets/RichEroica1.jpg

[charliedid]

Had a guy on a carbon wonder bike ask me once why I would ride a "bike like that", referring to one of my vintage steel beauties. I was dumbstruck. It was sort of like someone claiming that art had no value, and efficiency was the ultimate goal of life.

Art? I thought we were talking about old bikes.

[charliedid]

[QUOTE=Saxon;2105827]The top of the line beauties from the 70's/80's were my dream bikes growing up. I've owned more modern carbon race bikes and while they do perform better (I still ride most of my old bikes with period brakes, etc...) they're not a replacement, just different. I've gone into local bike shops recently thinking I may pick up a new bike, but I'm spiritually indifferent to the cookie cutter bikes.



Old bikes are the works of God and new bikes are melded at the hand of the devil!

This is getting good.

[weisan]

Old bikes are the works of God and new bikes are melded at the hand of the devil!

This is getting good.

Er...C...h....ar.....l....i...ee....ppppaaaa.....l l

are you adding more coals in the fire to keep your train runnin'...?

http://www.mylearning.org/learning/transport-explorer/NYMR%20LJ%20003.jpg

[charliedid]

Er...C...h....ar.....l....i...ee....ppppaaaa.....l l

are you adding more coals in the fire to keep your train runnin'...?

http://www.mylearning.org/learning/transport-explorer/NYMR%20LJ%20003.jpg

Old trains...

[Burnette]

I found this video some time ago and I think it is germane to this topic.
After riding a retro bike, the rider was converted and said he would buy a steel bike now. His findings mirror what others here have stated, some of these bikes ride really well, are stiff enough and yet more comfortable, something you could hammer on and also be able to ride all day. Take a look.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZbVsrYPOGE

[El Chaba]

I have plenty of cycling equipment. For years I got quite excited about going to races and scanning magazines, etc. to look at the equipment that some of the big shots were using...especially if it was something special. Then almost overnight, the equipment suppliers to the pros were no longer smaller, privately owned companies completely dedicated to making the best products they could. Money was driving the sport like never before and the craftsman companies were pushed to the side or all the way out. Now the equipment sponsors are part of the cash equation as opposed to being primarily suppliers. They have lost me as I have almost no interest in the equipment at all.
To me, classic and vintage bikes are a throwback to the era when I felt some excitement about cycling equipment. When I was a senior in high school, I had serious bike lust for a Peugeot PRO 10....Peugeot had a small SSC shop in which they made bikes for their team pros. They never publicized it much, but one could order one of these machines-custom made for you, just like the pro team. They were only available as a complete equipped like the team. They were expensive-about twice the price of the similarly equipped factory made model. I had saved my money and was prepared to make my deposit and wait. I was advised that it would take about 8 months on average-depending upon whether or not your order would be delayed by the building of bikes for the pro team. That made me feel good about the wait. I could hold off for the benefit of Phil Anderson, Stephen Roche, or Gilbert Duclos-LaSalle....My father had other ideas...I should save my money for college. As practical and obviously correct as this call was from the real world, it was horribly wrong. I should have bought the bike. I never satisfied my lust for one until last year when I encountered one perfectly sized for me, spooky almost. It is an absolute dream to ride...the light gauge Reynolds tubing has a very twangy feel. Every time I see this bike, I am transported back to 1980. Every time I ride it, it is the same. For all of the advancements in cycling technology, the industry has lost touch with its roots as to how to make a bike FEEL like it's something quite special.

[merckx]

^^^^all of this^^^^

[stephenmarklay]

This post makes me want and older bike :)

[rccardr]

This post makes me want an older bike

That can be taken care of:

http://i797.photobucket.com/albums/yy254/rccardr/83%20Medici%20Pro%20Strada/Med%20right_zpsxhtfxaag.jpg (http://s797.photobucket.com/user/rccardr/media/83%20Medici%20Pro%20Strada/Med%20right_zpsxhtfxaag.jpg.html)

http://i797.photobucket.com/albums/yy254/rccardr/59cm%20Frejus/Frejus%20build%202/Frejus%202%20right%20side_zpsnyjzqwcw.jpg (http://s797.photobucket.com/user/rccardr/media/59cm%20Frejus/Frejus%20build%202/Frejus%202%20right%20side_zpsnyjzqwcw.jpg.html)

http://i797.photobucket.com/albums/yy254/rccardr/Cinelli%201978%20china%20blue/Cinelli%20Eroica%202016%20right%20side_zpsnazddpej .jpg (http://s797.photobucket.com/user/rccardr/media/Cinelli%201978%20china%20blue/Cinelli%20Eroica%202016%20right%20side_zpsnazddpej .jpg.html)

[stephenmarklay]

That can be taken care of:

http://i797.photobucket.com/albums/yy254/rccardr/83%20Medici%20Pro%20Strada/Med%20right_zpsxhtfxaag.jpg (http://s797.photobucket.com/user/rccardr/media/83%20Medici%20Pro%20Strada/Med%20right_zpsxhtfxaag.jpg.html)

http://i797.photobucket.com/albums/yy254/rccardr/59cm%20Frejus/Frejus%20build%202/Frejus%202%20right%20side_zpsnyjzqwcw.jpg (http://s797.photobucket.com/user/rccardr/media/59cm%20Frejus/Frejus%20build%202/Frejus%202%20right%20side_zpsnyjzqwcw.jpg.html)

http://i797.photobucket.com/albums/yy254/rccardr/Cinelli%201978%20china%20blue/Cinelli%20Eroica%202016%20right%20side_zpsnazddpej .jpg (http://s797.photobucket.com/user/rccardr/media/Cinelli%201978%20china%20blue/Cinelli%20Eroica%202016%20right%20side_zpsnazddpej .jpg.html)


I know and your bikes are my size. I vow to make enough money this year to take one off your hands :)

[Black Dog]

Sometimes you need the old with the new. Take the best from every era.

http://i900.photobucket.com/albums/ac209/BlackDogryka/Serotta%20CII/IMG_2946_zpscvn7ndy6.jpg (http://s900.photobucket.com/user/BlackDogryka/media/Serotta%20CII/IMG_2946_zpscvn7ndy6.jpg.html)

[stephenmarklay]

Sometimes you need the old with the new. Take the best from every era.

http://i900.photobucket.com/albums/ac209/BlackDogryka/Serotta%20CII/IMG_2946_zpscvn7ndy6.jpg (http://s900.photobucket.com/user/BlackDogryka/media/Serotta%20CII/IMG_2946_zpscvn7ndy6.jpg.html)

Agreed. I like my 90’s CSI well but I do NEED a friction shifting Italian at some point.

[charliedid]

This post makes me want and older bike :)

I'm almost convinced ;-)

[charliedid]

Sometimes you need the old with the new. Take the best from every era.

http://i900.photobucket.com/albums/ac209/BlackDogryka/Serotta%20CII/IMG_2946_zpscvn7ndy6.jpg (http://s900.photobucket.com/user/BlackDogryka/media/Serotta%20CII/IMG_2946_zpscvn7ndy6.jpg.html)

I'd take that one.

[charliedid]

I found this video some time ago and I think it is germane to this topic.
After riding a retro bike, the rider was converted and said he would buy a steel bike now. His findings mirror what others here have stated, some of these bikes ride really well, are stiff enough and yet more comfortable, something you could hammer on and also be able to ride all day. Take a look.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZbVsrYPOGE

Thanks for that

[Repack Rider]

Interesting that bikes and popular music were both better when I was younger.

The kids these days. They ride full suspension, I had to make my first bike out of flint.

[Ken Robb]

Interesting that bikes and popular music were both better when I was younger.

The kids these days. They ride full suspension, I had to make my first bike out of flint.
Yeah, and when I was a kid I had to wade 10 feet through DEEP shag carpet to changes channels on our TV. :D

[m_sasso]

Bikes are about, the value they add to one's life, however you judge that.

[pdmtong]

As seen today. Ignore the saddle and tape and hoods
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170112/7a803f3818c3c7aa024a45d0b8a46cf5.jpg

[Bob Ross]

So, for those of you that get excited by older bikes, what is the appeal?

I hesitate to suggest that I get "excited" by older bikes; in almost every case I would rather ride a contemporary bike, and I wasn't even particularly aware of bikes (other than the Schwinn I owned) during the heyday [sic] of the 60s-90s.

But fwiw, I think a frame made of 1" pipes, with a level toptube, and a slender, gently curving fork with square shoulders, is one of the most gorgeous tools on the planet.

So that's the appeal for me: Purely aesthetics.