Pros and cons of restoring an old bike

[fiamme red]

A very lukewarm review from someone who put a Potenza group on a Concorde Squadra:

https://cyclingtips.com/2017/02/the-pros-and-cons-of-restoring-a-classic-road-bike/

The first thing to stand out was the weight of the Squadra. Compared to a modern bike, it was slow. Slow to get going, difficult to lift the pace, and cumbersome on climbs. Indeed, trying to get the bike to respond in the same manner as a modern bike was a waste of energy...

The silky ride quality quickly became my favourite aspect of the bike, and it was something that could be truly savoured while dosing my efforts. That doesn’t mean the Squadra was especially compliant — in fact, it was quick to telegraph potholes, ruts and corrugations — yet there was something akin to politeness in the way that the bike behaved when shaken by the terrain...

Aside from the extra weight, the other obvious shortcoming was how rubbery the front end of the bike felt. The frame was quite susceptible to lateral torsion, especially about the head tube and there was a lot of obvious flex in the stem and handlebars. It wasn’t something that ever unnerved me — in fact, the bike proved stable, even at high speeds — but I much prefer the extra sturdiness that modern bikes have to offer.

That lateral flex extended to the bottom bracket. I never found much satisfaction when sprinting out of the saddle, and while that was due mostly to the heft of the bike, there was a sense that the bike was soaking up some of my effort. Ultimately, this wasn’t much of a shortcoming in the context of the rest of the bike, since it was constantly urging me to sit down, relax, and enjoy the ride.

One of the things that a modern groupset has to offer is a wider range of gear ratios than a classic transmission. With the extra weight of the Squadra, low gear ratios became indispensable for long climbs to the point where I found myself using bigger cogs than I’d ever use on a modern bike. For those pondering a classic bike project, I’d recommend compact chainrings and a wide-range cassette unless the bike is going to be reserved for easy rides on flat terrain.

I spent a few months riding the Squadra, and while there were some very obvious shortcomings when compared to a modern bike, it consistently provided a refreshing contrast. Ultimately, this is perhaps the strongest argument for resurrecting a classic road bike. If nothing else, it provides a valuable perspective from which to judge how far modern road bikes have come..."For those pondering a classic bike project, I’d recommend compact chainrings and a wide-range cassette unless the bike is going to be reserved for easy rides on flat terrain."

Actually, racers from the steel age generally used much higher low gears than today's racers on ultra-light carbon.

[Louis]

"The first thing to stand out was the weight of the Squadra. Compared to a modern bike, it was slow. Slow to get going, difficult to lift the pace, and cumbersome on climbs."

I wonder if this effect is truly do to the weight of the bike?

Let's say the "old" bike is 5 pounds heavier than the modern bike, and you're going from 17 pounds (pretty light in my book) to 22 pounds. That's a significant increase, but to really compare you have to look at the total weight of what's being accelerated. Let's say the rider + gear is 175 pounds.

The increase, then, is a factor of 175 + 22 / 175 + 17, or a factor of x 1.026, which imo is a pretty teeny increase that should not suddenly make the bike "slow to get going and difficult to lift the pace."

[Black Dog]

A lot of what he wrote was pulled out of his arse. He expected the bike to ride a certain way and then he imagined that it did. Confirmational bias. The stuff about the mass difference was especially spuriously written. Torsional stiffnes on the front end...:rolleyes: He should be writing music reviews.

[fogrider]

A very lukewarm review from someone who put a Potenza group on a Concorde Squadra:

https://cyclingtips.com/2017/02/the-pros-and-cons-of-restoring-a-classic-road-bike/

"For those pondering a classic bike project, I’d recommend compact chainrings and a wide-range cassette unless the bike is going to be reserved for easy rides on flat terrain."

Actually, racers from the steel age generally used much higher low gears than today's racers on ultra-light carbon.

today, we living in an age with crazy light parts, it's possible to build a very rideable bike around 10 pounds. first, the potenza group is not exactly lightweight for modern standards. A few years ago, I picked up a Ron Cooper and the frame was 4.6 pounds...it took me 9 months before I built it up. I wasn't too excited about building a 4.6 pound frame, but when I did get it going, it was a really fun ride. and that was with mostly parts from what I had sitting around. after riding it around for 6 months, I had it repainted and got some decent parts on it. weighs in right around 18.5 pounds and climbs pretty well in the SF bay area hills.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/72776081@N03/

[FlashUNC]

Not their finest work.

[rustychisel]

I believe I'm right in suggesting after many years of considering, a good bike is a good bike is a good bike.*

I suspect if the thing rides as he says it wasn't a very good bike.



*Based on the premise that it fits you properly.

[Fivethumbs]

My experience has been that a lot of the difference is psychological. I have a full carbon Ridley Excalbur and a few vintage steel bikes. When I first jump on the Ridley it feels light like I can whip it around and fly up climbs; however, when I go on my normal loop I find that it feels just as hard going uphill as the vintage bikes and I don't get home any faster. My total weight with Ridley is 233. My total weight with the other bikes is 238. The extra five pounds just doesn't made that huge of a difference.

[Black Dog]

Physics and reality are 100% stiffer than psychology. :banana:

[El Chaba]

Nobody ever rode fast prior to the invention of carbon frames.....

[R3awak3n]

One things for sure, that squadra looks better than any modern bike. Really digging the new potenza on that frame.

[AngryScientist]

people dont want to believe it, but are heavily influenced by preconceived notions. if you think you're riding a heavy, outdated bike, it'll probably feel like you're riding a heavy, outdated bike.

[rccardr]

So, is that why I feel like I'm surrounded by unicorns farting rainbows traveling at the speed of light when I ride this?

http://i797.photobucket.com/albums/yy254/rccardr/Pelizzoli%20Eroica/Jan%202017%20Occoquan%20Pel_zpsa3jqfs9h.jpg (http://s797.photobucket.com/user/rccardr/media/Pelizzoli%20Eroica/Jan%202017%20Occoquan%20Pel_zpsa3jqfs9h.jpg.html)

[merckx]

On many, many challenging weather days this man lifted me from my chair and set me on my bicycle. Little did he know. If you want a fast machine, lift your bum off the sofa.

[thwart]

Nobody ever rode fast prior to the invention of carbon frames.....

Yeah. Shame about that.

Reality check... I've got a 1969 Peugeot PX-10 frameset that weighs just over 6 lbs. My Pegoretti Duende frameset weighs 5.2 lbs.

I doubt most folks would notice that huge difference.

And yeah, OK, my Parlee Z4 frameset weighs 3 lbs.

Again, reality check... given the very same parts and build, you're talking a 3 lb difference between a 48 year old bike and a modern, light carbon race bike.

[Hilltopperny]

While there can be some drawbacks from an older steel frame it's pretty evident that the author seems has gone into this with a preconceived notion that older bikes just don't cut it. Yes a few pounds can help, but I started road riding on a Reynolds 531 Austro Daimler Royal X with a mix of suntour superbe pro, dura ace and Normandy hubs on 27" wheels. The biggest drawback I had was the lack of good tires. I kept up with all the other guys on morning group rides just fine while they were all riding modern bikes.

I was faster then than I am now. 12 speeds a steel bike and better fitness were the key. I have since had 3 surgeries on my foot and ankle and just can't physically put out what I used to even with a 16lb carbon bike which is easily 4 to 5lbs lighter and had a modern group.

A good bike is a good bike and if the fit is done right and you have the legs and lungs for it then I don't believe it really matters what your riding all that much. For me comfort is paramount to being able to put in the miles. An ill fitting super bike isn't as good as a proper fitting retro steel bike that fits...

[paredown]

I can see how someone who has only known modern setups might hop on a classic and feel disoriented--although I'm not sure "cumbersome" is the right word.

Skinny bars and stem alone feel weird if you have only been grabbing the fat stuff. And no doubt more road information gets telegraphed through a 1" steel fork--my joke was you can ride over a 25 cent piece and know if it's heads or tails.

Maybe you can feel more flex in the front end--but I don't remember this ever being a problem (which he kind of admits...).

My backup bike is a Concorde EL-OS (made by Bilatto, I believe) of a similar generation, and I have "modern" 10 Campy on it, and I find it lively. I certainly don't find the "extra" weight a problem--in fact when I first hopped on a really light bike, I found that disorienting--moved more in cross winds etc, and the dampening from the carbon fork made me miss the telegraphing of a steel fork, although now that the arthritis is getting worse, I do like the ride with carbon forks.

For knocking around--give me a classic steel frame please.

[fignon's barber]

Although the author was a bit tough on the old concorde, I thought the article was fairly balanced.
A couple years ago I compared a state of the art carbon bike (Canyon Ult CF SLX) with a classic (Merckx MXL) for 2 months of training races, alternating between bikes. Rides were flat,fast, "A" group variety.
The Canyon was 7 pounds lighter with 50mm carbon wheels. The MXL had archtype clinhers.
In summary, my placings were similar. The Merckx looked nicer and the ride was smoother (noticeable on rougher rounds). On the other hand , the Canyon was absolutely stiffer in the front end and accelerated a bit quicker out of the corner. Modern steel with modern stem and 31.8 bars is probably "best of both worlds" for most.

[bobswire]

So, is that why I feel like I'm surrounded by unicorns farting rainbows traveling at the speed of light when I ride this?

http://i797.photobucket.com/albums/yy254/rccardr/Pelizzoli%20Eroica/Jan%202017%20Occoquan%20Pel_zpsa3jqfs9h.jpg (http://s797.photobucket.com/user/rccardr/media/Pelizzoli%20Eroica/Jan%202017%20Occoquan%20Pel_zpsa3jqfs9h.jpg.html)

Yucking boat anchor! :D

One of if not the best period build I ever seen.

[jruhlen1980]

I didn't think he was too rough on the old bike, but maybe had some confirmational bias.

He attributes the bike's lack of responsiveness to the fact that it's old and steel, but I would argue that has more to do with geometry. My Lovell (circa 1982) sprints like a scalded dog when I stand up and mash the pedals, but it also some of the shortest chainstays and tightest rear triangle I've ever seen.

This line, however, made me LOL: "There is also the risk that spreading the dropouts will hasten any fatigue that has developed in the rear end of the frame."

Yeah, sure, whatever. :rolleyes:

Also, the biggest improvement in sprinting and hill climbing I ever made was by dropping 20 pounds from the engine. Amazing how much faster my old, "heavy", steel bike goes up hills these days.

[Black Dog]

Although the author was a bit tough on the old concorde, I thought the article was fairly balanced.
A couple years ago I compared a state of the art carbon bike (Canyon Ult CF SLX) with a classic (Merckx MXL) for 2 months of training races, alternating between bikes. Rides were flat,fast, "A" group variety.
The Canyon was 7 pounds lighter with 50mm carbon wheels. The MXL had archtype clinhers.
In summary, my placings were similar. The Merckx looked nicer and the ride was smoother (noticeable on rougher rounds). On the other hand , the Canyon was absolutely stiffer in the front end and accelerated a bit quicker out of the corner. Modern steel with modern stem and 31.8 bars is probably "best of both worlds" for most.

No offence meant here but how can you claim this without any actual data. Perception is really not a good indictor of what is actually happening in these circumstances.

[dancinkozmo]

heres another retro vs modern....i think its been posted here before:

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

[bobswire]

heres another retro vs modern....i think its been posted here before:

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

That was cool, never saw it before.

[velofinds]

Some damn good-looking bikes in that article, including the subject bike.

https://cdn-cyclingtips.pressidium.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Squadra_build-11.jpg

https://cdn-cyclingtips.pressidium.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Squadra_build-13.jpg

Would pick over a modern Giant or Trek 10 times out of 10.

[MikeD]

The problem with vintage bikes is the rear wheel spacing, unless you're happy with 5 or 6 speed components. You could have the rear triangle spread if it's a steel bike, but...

[icepick_trotsky]

From the article, regarding dropout spacing:

Some will argue that older frames with 126mm spacing can be used, with or without cold-setting, to fit a 130mm hub, but that doesn’t mean the chainline will be well suited to an 11-speed transmission.

What the hell is that guy talking about? The BB is the same width, so the chainline will be exactly the same.

[velofinds]

The problem with vintage bikes is the rear wheel spacing, unless you're happy with 5 or 6 speed components. You could have the rear triangle spread if it's a steel bike, but...

I'm running 11s just fine in an old Peugeot that hasn't been respaced. Suspect plenty of others are doing exactly the same.

[MikeD]

I'm running 11s just fine in an old Peugeot that hasn't been respaced. Suspect plenty of others are doing exactly the same.


I bet your derailleur hanger is out of alignment. The dropouts are supposed to be parallel to each other. The wheel doesn't hold in there as well either if the dropouts aren't parallel and it puts a bending load on the rear axle. Just jamming the wheel in there is not an optimal solution. Note: I'm talking about vintage bikes which have 120mm spacing.

[mtechnica]

Pros: looks cool

Cons: heavier and frame flexes more


... sounds about right?

[rccardr]

MikeD, you are correct- going from 120 to 130 OLD really does require cold setting and dropout alignment. However, going from 126 to 130 does not.

Sure, in a perfect world, everything would be perfectly aligned. But in reality that 2 mm per side does not degrade shifting even with the somewhat otherwise finicky 11 speed stuff.

[dancinkozmo]

MikeD, you are correct- going from 120 to 130 OLD really does require cold setting and dropout alignment. However, going from 126 to 130 does not.

Sure, in a perfect world, everything would be perfectly aligned. But in reality that 2 mm per side does not degrade shifting even with the somewhat otherwise finicky 11 speed stuff.

yup....
example : spacing on a surly crosscheck is 132 ...designed so you can run 130 or 135 hubs no problem

[dancinkozmo]

Some damn good-looking bikes in that article, including the subject bike.


Would pick over a modern Giant or Trek 10 times out of 10.

i would pick it 11 times out of 10 ;)

[R3awak3n]

same here. Funny, that article is making me want to get one of those concords and put some potenza on it. I don't have any vintage rides anymore but I would love to have one again, love vintage bikes.

[colker]

A modern bike can be a noodle and an old bike can be stiff. Is a Merckx mx leader a noddle?Ok,... not the best climbing bike.
How about time trials frames which are stiff and heavy?
How about a pegoretti big leg emma?
How about a stiff 4lbs aluminum frame?
Short, big diameter chainstays in whatever material you serve me make the difference.
stiff and light carbon wheels makes much more difference than everything else.

[El Chaba]

I'm not a retrogrouch and have some very modern carbon bikes...plural as in more than I need. The difference between a modern carbon wonderbike and a mid 1980's top level steel bike is there...but it is small....disappointingly small. They definitely feel different. In that era there was an emphasis placed on ride quality and balance by the better makers. The material is almost immaterial in that if you ride a carbon bike from a skilled maker with the same emphasis-such as a Colnago C40, Time VXRS or classic DeRosa King you will experience a ride quality very similar to a great steel bike. That sense of balance is mostly lost today in the pursuit of weight loss, stiffness, etc. In my opinion, most modern bikes-top class ones at that- ride like crap. Riders have gotten used to that weird, harsh stiffness and when they experience a bike with real balance they falsely conclude that it must be slower.

[thirdgenbird]

same here. Funny, that article is making me want to get one of those concords and put some potenza on it. I don't have any vintage rides anymore but I would love to have one again, love vintage bikes.

Grab a cheap vintage frame, potenza, and some scirocco 35s. It should be low cost and the rim depth should help balance the visual weight of the cranks.

[simplemind]

Not too off the subject, but I have a mint PDG OS (Waterford) about 1992 I think. The rear stays are about 5 1/4" wide. Can I put a "modern" 10-11 speed derailleur on it ( a non-wrench here), if not, what is my best option to get this in its best possible configuration?

[bfd]

Not too off the subject, but I have a mint PDG OS (Waterford) about 1992 I think. The rear stays are about 5 1/4" wide. Can I put a "modern" 10-11 speed derailleur on it ( a non-wrench here), if not, what is my best option to get this in its best possible configuration?

5 1/4" is about 133mm and since all "modern" RD require a spacing of 130mm, you're good to go! If still not sure, borrow a 130mm rear wheel and put it on. You'll know.

Alternatively, if it is the older 126mm spacing, since the frame is steel, you should be able to have a shop "spread" the rear to accommodate the 130mm rear wheel. Or just throw a 130mm rear wheel on it and see! Good Luck!

[classtimesailer]

Vintage Steel Sucks.
Maybe that will keep the prices reasonable for those of us who don't know better.

[jruhlen1980]

5 1/4" is about 133mm and since all "modern" RD require a spacing of 130mm, you're good to go! If still not sure, borrow a 130mm rear wheel and put it on. You'll know.

Alternatively, if it is the older 126mm spacing, since the frame is steel, you should be able to have a shop "spread" the rear to accommodate the 130mm rear wheel. Or just throw a 130mm rear wheel on it and see! Good Luck!

Yeah I pop the 130mm rear wheel in and out of my 126mm-spaced bike all the time without any issue. It's Columbus SL tubing, if that matters.

[Steelman]

The problem with vintage bikes is the rear wheel spacing, unless you're happy with 5 or 6 speed components. You could have the rear triangle spread if it's a steel bike, but...

7 speed was used on 126mm as well.

1991 was the first year of Campagnolo 8 speed, and therefore 130mm or the compromise 128mm spacing, and that is more than 25 years ago.

Point being, there are many great vintage steel frames out there with modern spacing. And many of them have relatively lightweight, oversize, and perhaps heat-treated tubes.

[martl]

It is bollocks that one would need different gearing just because using a lugged steel frame.
Myself and 500 others, some of them young and extremely fit, most of us on then-state-of-the-art superlight superstiff bikes got our asses kicked as late as the early 2000s by an almost 60-year old dude riding a Colnago Master at an italian racing series of hillclimb TTs.

The difference *is* there but is miniscule. Very little in performance, a lot in how the ride feels.

Many folks socialized in things cycling on modern-age fat alloy or CFK bikes will be baffled by comparably soft BBs, flexy stems and handlebars, and possibly the riding position.

[FlashUNC]

One wonders how Fausto Coppi ever rode his bike like a scalded cat.

[choke]

The author is right, old steel bikes are junk. I can't imagine anyone riding one of those dinosaurs.

In the interest of helping all of you who own one (size 54/55) to dispose of these worthless frames/bikes, I will take them off of your hands so that I can give them a decent burial. Please PM for my shipping address and include your paypal; since I'm a nice guy I'll pay for the cost of shipping.

[El Chaba]

One wonders how Fausto Coppi ever rode his bike like a scalded cat.

This......and without the "benefit" of a threadless, oversize axle bottom bracket.....

[simplemind]

5 1/4" is about 133mm and since all "modern" RD require a spacing of 130mm, you're good to go! If still not sure, borrow a 130mm rear wheel and put it on. You'll know.

Alternatively, if it is the older 126mm spacing, since the frame is steel, you should be able to have a shop "spread" the rear to accommodate the 130mm rear wheel. Or just throw a 130mm rear wheel on it and see! Good Luck!

Yeah I pop the 130mm rear wheel in and out of my 126mm-spaced bike all the time without any issue. It's Columbus SL tubing, if that matters.

Thanks, what about the BB. Would I have any trouble fitting a "modern" compact crank/rings?

[Frankwurst]

So, is that why I feel like I'm surrounded by unicorns farting rainbows traveling at the speed of light when I ride this?

http://i797.photobucket.com/albums/yy254/rccardr/Pelizzoli%20Eroica/Jan%202017%20Occoquan%20Pel_zpsa3jqfs9h.jpg (http://s797.photobucket.com/user/rccardr/media/Pelizzoli%20Eroica/Jan%202017%20Occoquan%20Pel_zpsa3jqfs9h.jpg.html)

Hell I feel like I'm surrounded by unicorns farting rainbows traveling at the speed of light just looking at it. If I could ride it I'd probably feel the same but there would be butterfly fields.:beer: That's a peach.

[giordana93]

I would add that to get the truly saintly ride of old steel, there is no excuse not to run classic box tubulars at 400 gram or below rim weight and the nicest tubular tires you can afford. It will blow your mind if all you've ever ridden are stiff-ass high profile rims and low spoke count wheels --which are fine in a modern race bike context, but there is a reason people bitch about road buzz and run two layers of gel-filled bar tape...

[PeregrineA1]

I can help with disposal...
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/wf7zezCaMqI1CZ0XEf9COY-uHgUNhDxLPjd7Pe2T_9HheQRkKipGhwI-Qmo0rFA5gh6hkOCS7Op5rMVlB59HikLcQbHUREXmyT9NwWIi_M QgBUDS4nOLsXlB8iRafGGit6vSh6w-GHAe1ZFyNuOKKGLI9yy76jgNOm_LaJqmHuMz7aF8SaDgC9_d5k-H0H8qar22jqV7GEQt-O-GesTSPIHefoupJtiC0mhxnhEY3LitOQH8JpuKtbpKykSuGfR1j t32ldkhka5fd1VlZVUISKPnUUED-RzVhoVMjmBhVoB1D3YPVGDt39TGg9d3fN8nw88Qqsj_EqijqCE obakZxFknVwGS4St-ezLyfJb8MeDOT3lLLdGAb6rCfSsDr5535R5LarKROWEWvIbKM1 gQEfooBY5UzBqza7COuEdgnSt2l9pgy_9WR-BTnDj_PEa890MZboWyKEmBZM28Mdx6YWJ4MydH3Q6sr6PejDkt NqlllVq3EfA9rIWg4Q6t_RZRNZ3Z4EeUSQoMj01_KicDamkpTW 1scy7P5y6OI80Zueuwehv4OGHAmKHHmL5OwtqeIuiyNlTxjE5U RgkR4gvXvB_B8XQfEaGPNmcuXLGjcK2gBQZQd_94=w1230-h923-no

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/_sZQIZMjdYYlci-qWPeZW0AhKjKyKPZFLPAF1BiLjam7ORjgyI0iEHmiN0G1g7ZZH aLuUsqd1DHvAWIwVOG_EvB8ZbzSErEs--w_MxBHgJHPrz8ZbXADp1oeUXmdUJsZ-dsl3s4DHi_DpaMxuFjaL6Pk71rS1CDavmPVLJXkm0NlzvsgSMw-MF9GvVgGruz73Ek2melph6s0ReLuafkeWbdQAXutgbtKmcSjLi asvRHKDaVmcReEL0Y-D2o__D4SarQZsYmyx2fzFjpQ1rHV0KJNKiIDZGP7dRiikqclb_ YxkO-xotPfL_b2CTS_DbW9vZo1HNV0It0kDzopKlMBsHDvXcDs9CX92 ztQ4AaYtkWkWLtcZAKCEkBGwqDIszZYaAAv7HFGYv-UbQ5RD2z6D8d1cE5x8Px-1w-hNAVheWrAuLVSZ6zBSEPoVZNOZKD-SUzsSAERz-xwho1upTxdhQQx48BlAbjbx5h3ASVoafNU0uFeRmk9MBJPnZ1V 4yUG0vgkbTfXmUGWpRCV_ZEZq7r8QMnJXJ2iC5MCk0zQBllMlv bG-1fAgXooXz5Bc4p50O_kJobeWNGr61WyxzAzGTjJUXKUA5jMuSU p8mC-visFHpYpduIv=w1230-h923-no

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/HO2j7JM-alcCCneG2iy2VPfmHusPGKZmspTKFqL2xkFCVhfsm9cVOxCfRv 5w7jjIjtYQGiQcALcFmSswXFP7IFCsfFdElKgUxx3NbGNFrlEr BfuookxUXqxlOJKcFAiGrbSN1QKSFftKKDcBfJVQIs6ySO1Ge5 6dOX-yqoPhR-MiclrUxFJruZauBhoKM4VpXSYuLVnxDdtspXmGMPrC_MqRoWTO zkohBlEBUa0o2UGecN7X6rD49yEmUV7bgZB9D0PC5m8zAUMwTx v1uXqzFCwG7d8b5wBrVYOvzoU-ow7jSn6SCs2QaTJDHJap_R8_clelyLdP-epZ0_7epKrHKp06g-jctslihyFecnmAis4B61kLi_KWmfiGCdCu3F2xfDouzGUQAQJa CyWNTJaLG6wnmayB9xICSsQz3ujEouLmL3_VmSPrFWyTz7eFCK 1vhqbWrvhDhWKO-7ER_o0w-ggkdT1tRRZa-p1sveAJxJoLG_ZJMgu1xM8qZfQL3RDvB2fzpUm-BOFygig3IxzYhgqtKSC25dMSu4lx_7sAsl99_6WGJhJBWi2wTz H1hM5aMT2vycUc_1uSBEErgCa0kegmZn5N8RE3_B2N9bYPxs6s oBQNPgb5=w1385-h923-no

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/PFxOLiZqHtDKk6Zn0OBMhFjtD-2J-TDkWqQZqT1PtcNkYVCLlI-fgNWTbt2S0I4aiA9_0w-NYeMBGLpbHz4qpaVR1J1ZxnX6X8X9gsbDNHOarSDP1tluthAwn Q76X-WN0nYaytwN6hXo1Y7CHTVfgf24NQa-8GkWjkXJrj-T6eTXLMCZUAa5EExgKts0IsUG4mJNbKj49ecTevogVzAnQVlaL 1YevaxHuqOIKiAfwdLpAGk5ZIwstAoyZq_6q870JW8B0dxXoW-ef6PDQQKPK0PXvWUB9wyfn0fJUKliIO20o4s6wP2ojTcXr540Y aIXD0Xdurv_d_tPKM5K00Po6QpzJfyELWFMp1O21Clmye9gys5 Vt7QZkBjGSsBWxjwPqjFXGlCfI7s8e3AyuaRW6YHx_KZ_fwraB QVBk_E2cNMAFRfjYEnCOkHugdyfao1v_cbNuPlJXH5MtuBmSVM BuZZc_lSZF6xyEAA0ACWIq72JOlpu8fZf30vCsO2JNCq9GsatN ThTfYZp_BvN4HJZyoPLkKRWItC82MAaB3WuJVoLonNYO3iNMna co8utBEyuthEkPk9nUJUur4LOw2FETVnT5eSnWjP1sT6LC8Ci0 D6DBKQXTM0J=w1230-h923-no

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/C5WmX3UICryQsajsAc2nMLpog3YUh_HNXp5BlBuw6hF1KDH9Ga htDUCiPmYJllXUQoOSnoUVtngK5FvbN4Ml6seqNxOA-dOu1AB00gOQXD1nKK4ObTAQQd9kotRP5C4H_WVD--0xnwCBbtOO1_jn425BFaEPMmpWNckYYotII2WcG5zjWbe-0xibQ5SUqnUxoxhSwaENnlwGLC4J7BUyrMSbb_EChPAUknnncT fENDlLooP79aSdkRvnckMqFtOIw49JpnF6VMFfx9CEnTiAodNq dlBX7X19KtjuVeu-bDMYydPphYHg8A-0DeWFxzQ4U82xPYxL2YFM7anjg8cbQz89siRROkO5OvcWEU0WJ jDL2wu3luVsNojlJ5Ju8gqiLFVqS9lvQ_rQrdnzAopVLHlOmIR GFyfLhYvPlcy_u7kJyds6Ebm9O2LZezl8lVBRDE9rTpV_yGQY2 1oWZ0haujr3UB-NvJqkNjQYOV_QnZBbiXlpJ8jlaho9JkRMQZl5S4G3R_kbzqKIk lmYnXsxQw1zNq_rxx4YiAr5iv2ZkFOvXDFnt3yJVXIFiSe5cpa 1scQyIJKzprhwlJnx3weoxbADh1MtKiKb1qr1cDzX6UuSfDt-DqhK=w458-h344-no

I kind of like steel bikes.

[retrofit]

I never found much satisfaction when sprinting out of the saddle, and while that was due mostly to the heft of the bike,
there was a sense that the bike was soaking up some of my effort.

Perhaps the author is just "too light for steel" (http://forums.thepaceline.net/showthread.php?t=94250). :banana:

[fiamme red]

The article's title is misleading. It's about building up an old frame with new parts, not restoring an old bike.

From the article:

This risk of fatigue is amplified manyfold for classic bikes and components that may have endured many years of regular use. Unfortunately, there is no way to assess the remaining service life for a used frameset or component. The biggest concern relates to the fork, stem and handlebars since a sudden failure is likely to be catastrophic for the rider.Actually, a classic steel fork is extremely unlikely to snap catastrophically while you're just riding along. You'll get ample warning in advance if it starts to crack.

[oldpotatoe]

A lot of what he wrote was pulled out of his arse. He expected the bike to ride a certain way and then he imagined that it did. Confirmational bias. The stuff about the mass difference was especially spuriously written. Torsional stiffnes on the front end...:rolleyes: He should be writing music reviews.

Glad somebody said it. :D

[paredown]

The article's title is misleading. It's about building up an old frame with new parts, not restoring an old bike.

From the article:

Actually, a classic steel fork is extremely unlikely to snap catastrophically while you're just riding along. You'll get ample warning in advance if it starts to crack.

Agreed.

OTOH, there have been a few stories shared about sudden and catastrophic failure of vintage stems, which is one component I would probably replace on a really old bike.

But if you are doing a retro-modern build, just replace stem and bars together--problem solved.

[paredown]

I can help with disposal...
....
I kind of like steel bikes.
Nice fleet!

[oldpotatoe]

Yeah I pop the 130mm rear wheel in and out of my 126mm-spaced bike all the time without any issue. It's Columbus SL tubing, if that matters.

Since it's been mentioned a few times. Can you stuff a 130mm wheel into 126mm dropouts? Yes. Will it cause any problems? "Probably" not but maybe. When you force the dropouts to 130mm, now not parallel, then clamp down the QR, you 'can' or 'may' crack a dropout or the dropout to seat or chainstay junction. It's really really easy to cold set a frame to 130mm, since part of it is making the dropouts equidistant on each side and making the dropouts parallel.

Yes, yes, some have been doing it for years', but I have also seen 2 bikes(Bianchi steel and I forget the other one) which had breaks like described from stuffing a larger wheel into smaller dropouts.

IMHO, of course. :D

[justindcady]

Meh... Other than the frame not fitting me as well as my primary Trek Madone, there's nothing wrong with the '87 C-Dale SR500 I'll occasionally put a few miles on. Can definitely tell it's not as laterally stiff as the Madone or responsive in the steering, but who cares. I'm not racing the thing...LOL

I have entertained the thought of "upgrading" stuff on it, but not really being able to spread aluminum has turned me off. It'd be a really sweet back-up ride with even just a 8-speed rear setup over the current 6.

[MikeD]

Threaded headsets pose a problem as well, if you like the new handlebar shapes. You could try something like a Soma Highway 1 or a quill adapter. There are very few modern bars available in a 26 mm clamp diameter and even fewer quill stems available in the now standard 31.8 mm. After riding the newer bars with the flat perches to the levers, I absolutely hate the older bars that slope down to the levers. If I can't get comfortable on the bike, it ain't worth riding it.

[jruhlen1980]

Thanks, what about the BB. Would I have any trouble fitting a "modern" compact crank/rings?

Nope.

[rccardr]

Actually, that 87 Cannondale will easily accept a 130 OLD rear hub. Done it literally dozens of times over the past ten years, and those bikes have literally tens of thousands of cumulative miles on them without a problem. No need to cold set, just spread the staysj with your thumbs when installing the rear wheel. EZ PZ.

My fave travel bike is an 88 ST with all 10 speed Shimano. All day rider, very comfy, compact with a wide ratio cassette. So 8-9-10-11 speed upgrades are just a little wrenching away...