Has the vintage steel market crashed?

[vespasianus]

Originally Posted by KonaSS

Proving my point. 2.7% is huge too. Last year in the tour Pog lost by 7:30 to Vingegaard over 82 hours of racing. That is 0.15% slower. And 7 minutes is a pretty big gap. Lots of grand tours come down to differences of seconds.

I am not saying old bikes are trash. I am saying they aren't competitive when seconds matter. Why is it always the dudes who say "I am not a racer, but I don't believe that this new tech makes a difference......"

How about this - someone chime in who is competitive at a decent level of racing who is riding an old bike with box rims and tell me how it doesn't matter.

Your point is what? That is it of value to racers. Maybe. What made Ganna 2.7% faster. His nutrition? His skin suit? His body? The gearing? The tires? The actual track which is in better condition?

Saying the bike made it 2.7% better is un-scientific and comical. What it is, I don't know but I know that in the most ideal conditions, everything most likely will only get you a bit of improvement.

The data on things mentioned are pretty well established. I don't care either way. I have new and old bikes. I like my new carbon bike. But the data are the data. If people can't understand that...

[vespasianus]

Originally Posted by jamesdak

https://youtu.be/hMbafPbJ9AI?si=qs7Hgbh6niKb5HUe

That is not an experiment. My god.

[jamesdak]

Originally Posted by vespasianus

That is not an experiment. My god.

LOL, you can theorize and compare stats and argue and huff and puff about this or that...., or just go try it. Just imagine if he had proper gears and toe clips that fit.

[cash05458]

hey, if weekend riders or cat 3 crit racers want to trash old bikes to win a couple of free movie tickets and have a few beers after and enjoy the gloat...by all means! Certainly worth new ten grand aero bikes...and all that goes along with the newest new etc...more power to you.

Will say this via markets "crashing"...wait about six years and see your bikes go down in value in a hardcore way is my guess...these 15 grand specialized machines will be worth pennies on the dollar and you will be reading bike industry articles justifying why those frames and equipment are so far behind and seriously flawed via the newest product and just so useless...and you can get out your checkbook again. Let's take a look at resale values down the road. But yes, buy the very latest thing for sure! No one can deny a 2.7 percent bump in this life...on anything.

[jamesdak]

Originally Posted by glepore

You owe it to yourself to try one. I've had a whole bunch of bikes over the years, from modern carbon/aero stuff to vintage Pog's. One that stays in regular rotation now is an excell tubed Giordana from the 90's. Its totally modern rim brake stuff-SR eps and light carbon bars and brakes. Every time I get on it I'm reminded of how simply nice light steel designed by someone with Pegoretti's skill can be. Is it as fast as a new Supersix? Nope, but when out solo that doesn't matter, and you can either push yourself or just groove. I find that the newer stuff isn't as rewarding unless you're always hard on the gas.

Amen!!!! I'm sure I'm now over 90 bikes in the past 15 years or so and nothing yet equals how my one Giordana XL Super feels under me on the road. Although....I do have a Peg frameset finally in the house to be built up and given a chance. Even my favorite C.F. bike, the C40, is not the equal to me of the Giordana.

[exapkib]

I'll pile on with one more non-scientific, only-elite-when-I-ride-with-the-most-mediocre-cyclists piece of anecdotal evidence.

I was lucky to chance into a 1995-built Yamaguchi almost 12 years ago. Before that I had been riding a CAAD9. In moving to hand-built steel, I had expected to experience all of the internet platitudes we know so well--steel is real, steel is forgiving, more comfortable, etc.

What I did not expect is that the Yamaguchi's geometry made it ride so much 'faster' than the CAAD. Tens of thousands of miles later, it remains my favorite bike ever. Honestly. People on this forum sometimes talk about 'forever' bikes, but I'm living the dream.

I've since added a 'classic' Crumpton SL. Make no mistake--it's an incredible machine (that I will also never sell). The Crumpton came into the stable and lives happily alongside the Yamaguchi. I've set some PRs on the Crumpton. I've set many PRs on the Yamaguchi.

In short, I can't picture the bike that would replace the Yamaguchi for me. If these types of bikes really are selling at cheaper prices and you haven't tried one recently (or ever), you owe it to yourself to try a few out until you find something that sings.

So many good bikes out there. More importantly--so many good miles ahead of each of us. Whatever shape your adventure takes, make it count.

[5oakterrace]

Very interesting thread. I appreciate the contributions.

One issue which often is ignored is cost. A leitmotif of this thread is that old bikes are as fast, or almost as fast, as the latest and greatest. What leaves me apoplectic is that folks are willing to spend gobs of money for the latest. Folks spend tons of $ for disc brake bikes. Demand is such manufacturers no longer make rim brake bikes. Just wow. Granted discs are better but we debate forever the maintenance headaches and just how much better they are. But folks will spend big money for them.

The same can be said for "old" bikes vs. new. Lots of $ for the latest. This thread suggests folks pay a bundle for what are debatable "improvements." We can argue forever as to degree of improvement and the nature of the improvement. But the demand is for the latest.

I ponder what this says about human nature. Are we "taken" so easily by marketing hype? Maybe. Are we driven to impress others - and if so, it is to impress others by the amount of $ we are spending. That is almost a status thing. Maybe. Or is it that my satisfaction or peace is dependent on how I perceive my self as cyclist vis a vis the culture - irregardless of how the culture perceives me. I have the latest! Maybe.

Just intriguing how much we spend....and for what. Very few of us are making a living racing. These improvements may mean we place a bit better in some race - for the few of us who race. That is a ton of $ for a better place.

Just fascinating. Heck it is my money I will spend it as I so chose. That is fine. My curiosity is what motivates us.

[El Chaba]

In the discussion pertaining to the increase in speeds over the years, it should be mentioned at least as a sidebar that some or all of it could-or is likely- to be attributed to the increased effectiveness of performance enhancing drugs and the use of motor devices in some bikes.

[Talrand]

Originally Posted by El Chaba

In the discussion pertaining to the increase in speeds over the years, it should be mentioned at least as a sidebar that some or all of it could-or is likely- to be attributed to the increased effectiveness of performance enhancing drugs and the use of motor devices in some bikes.

You mean the thing that was discovered and confirmed literally ONCE in cycling's history? Yeah, major contribution to raising the average speed in that one women's CX race 8 years ago

[El Chaba]

Originally Posted by Talrand

You mean the thing that was discovered and confirmed literally ONCE in cycling's history? Yeah, major contribution to raising the average speed in that one women's CX race 8 years ago

Are you commenting about both performance enhancing drugs AND the use of motors or are you trying to use motors as a straw man to dismiss the entire topic?

[fignon's barber]

Originally Posted by 5oakterrace

Very interesting thread. I appreciate the contributions.

One issue which often is ignored is cost. A leitmotif of this thread is that old bikes are as fast, or almost as fast, as the latest and greatest. What leaves me apoplectic is that folks are willing to spend gobs of money for the latest. Folks spend tons of $ for disc brake bikes. Demand is such manufacturers no longer make rim brake bikes. Just wow. Granted discs are better but we debate forever the maintenance headaches and just how much better they are. But folks will spend big money for them.

The same can be said for "old" bikes vs. new. Lots of $ for the latest. This thread suggests folks pay a bundle for what are debatable "improvements." We can argue forever as to degree of improvement and the nature of the improvement. But the demand is for the latest.

I ponder what this says about human nature. Are we "taken" so easily by marketing hype? Maybe. Are we driven to impress others - and if so, it is to impress others by the amount of $ we are spending. That is almost a status thing. Maybe. Or is it that my satisfaction or peace is dependent on how I perceive my self as cyclist vis a vis the culture - irregardless of how the culture perceives me. I have the latest! Maybe.

Just intriguing how much we spend....and for what. Very few of us are making a living racing. These improvements may mean we place a bit better in some race - for the few of us who race. That is a ton of $ for a better place.

Just fascinating. Heck it is my money I will spend it as I so chose. That is fine. My curiosity is what motivates us.

As the saying goes, .......you can't take it with you.

[sg8357]

Originally Posted by fignon's barber

As the saying goes, .......you can't take it with you.

Well, who knows, no one has come back to tell.
I going to try the Egyptian method, where you have
small versions of items you'll need in the after life buried with you.
I'll have 1/4 scale Ellis buried with me.
Figure I'll use it to ride to the
Robert Johnson concerts in heaven.

[exapkib]

Originally Posted by sg8357

Well, who knows, no one has come back to tell.
I going to try the Egyptian method, where you have
small versions of items you'll need in the after life buried with you.
I'll have 1/4 scale Ellis buried with me.
Figure I'll use it to ride to the
Robert Johnson concerts in heaven.

Love it!

Also: morning addendum to my late-night post: for 'the regulars' on this forum I recognize that a 1995-built Yamaguchi is not "vintage steel," but my experience on group rides in the past five years has driven home the point that for most of the riders on the road today (read: younger riders racing and riding with clubs around here) not only is the Yamaguchi a relic from another era (as in: they're not sure what they're seeing but they can tell it's cool), but my Crumpton also reads as a vintage bike from another time.

Just a note.

[catchourbreath]

I've had and still have some aluminum bikes (only had a carbon bike once), but to me for a road bike that I don't ride nearly as much as I should a 20 year old steel bike comes in at a price point and the ride quality is very nice.

I'm sure as I've seen with aluminum, a higher quality bike would ride even better than my Ox Platinum Lemond but price increae is probably not worth it.

[Talrand]

Originally Posted by El Chaba

Are you commenting about both performance enhancing drugs AND the use of motors or are you trying to use motors as a straw man to dismiss the entire topic?

Why mention motors if they're basically irrelevant? Just making your point easier to pick apart by including obvious weaknesses?
As to the doping, no way we have more benefit now with all the testing and biological passports than we did when EPO was running free. It's never been harder to get gains from PEDs but you choose to assume they're more influential than ever?