Where does a classic road bike fit in your cycling life?

[mtechnica]

I like vintage road bikes, mostly for aesthetic reasons but they ride pretty good. Unfortunately I can’t be bothered to ride them over modern road bikes most of the time because they feel/are slower and less comfortable.

My only vintage road bike now is an Eddy Merckx corsa extra (SLX) with dura ace 7400 and 8 speed. It’s literally as good as it gets for vintage.

[jamesdak]

Originally Posted by mtechnica

I like vintage road bikes, mostly for aesthetic reasons but they ride pretty good. Unfortunately I can’t be bothered to ride them over modern road bikes most of the time because they feel/are slower and less comfortable.

My only vintage road bike now is an Eddy Merckx corsa extra (SLX) with dura ace 7400 and 8 speed. It’s literally as good as it gets for vintage.

I looked at around 7 years of my daily logs and realized that both my Madone 5.9 and my Scott CR1 Pro were never any faster than my steel bikes and on the longer rides normally slower. I contributed that to the beating I took on the chipseal when riding the C.F. bikes. The steel left me feeling fresher and able to carry a better pace on the longer rides. In fact the only time I saw a big advantage for the CF. was on one local CAT2 climb that was around 22 miles long. Over that distance my best time then was on the CR1 pro.

All my C.F. is gone (well except for the Y Foils) and I don't regret it at all. Of course I'm not that fast. I usually ride at least 25 miles daily and more on the weekends. A really fast avg pace for me is in the 20 mph range. Normal hard workout is in the 19 mph range and an avg riding day in the 18 mph range. Except this year, 7 months with knees jacked up has really slowed me down even more. I guess if I was riding a paceline with fast guys or a faster rider C.F. might, maybe, possibly, make a difference.

Dura Ace 7400 is soooooo good, isn't it?

[John H.]

To me, it doesn't fit.

I rode them when they were state of the art and that is what you raced on-
Lugged steel, box section tubulars, and everybody had the same thing.

To me- I appreciate a classic steel bike but I don't need one. The carbon wonder bike that I ride is better in every way.

So for me steel is just nostalgia.

[Clean39T]

Lots of interesting and intriguing responses here. I think I did a disservice to my question though by saying "classic" - it seems in most peoples' minds here, that means full steel and tubulars and retro/nostalgia. It's almost easier for me to feel the pull to those. I was thinking more modern-classic I guess, from the '00s through the '10s...

For me, these bikes below are emblematic road bikes from a bygone era - they are not what is chosen for setting fast times, having the most comfortable ride, or stopping well in the wet - so why (other than affordability, obviously) would one still choose them over something newer and more modern? Is it only nostalgia, or do these do something and evoke a feeling that surpasses the feeling of being on the latest/greatest/fastest/supplest option out there?

And I'm probably undercutting my thought here because the bikes below can fit reasonable rubber..

[Mike V]

Classic 80/90's grail lugged steel + 12 Campagnolo + Deda Superleggera + mid Bora =

[NHAero]

You've just said it - the original post offered the opportunity to conflate road bike with vintage.
I live where the pavement is very good. The bikes that get the most miles are the Firefly with rim brakes and 25 mm tires and 11 speed STI, and the 89 Casati with rim brakes and 28 mm tires and 10 speed Campy. Both pure road bikes. Firefly low gear is 34-34, Casati is 39-29. I don't get to low gear on the FF every ride, but I sure do on the Casati.
I have a lovely Anderson stainless with discs and 37 mm tires, but it gets less use. It's what I'd be likely to take for a few days off the island, where there are far more dirt road routes.
So for me, hard to imagine not having a pure road bike.

Originally Posted by Clean39T

Lots of interesting and intriguing responses here. I think I did a disservice to my question though by saying "classic" - it seems in most peoples' minds here, that means full steel and tubulars and retro/nostalgia. It's almost easier for me to feel the pull to those. I was thinking more modern-classic I guess, from the '00s through the '10s...

For me, these bikes below are emblematic road bikes from a bygone era - they are not what is chosen for setting fast times, having the most comfortable ride, or stopping well in the wet - so why (other than affordability, obviously) would one still choose them over something newer and more modern? Is it only nostalgia, or do these do something and evoke a feeling that surpasses the feeling of being on the latest/greatest/fastest/supplest option out there?

And I'm probably undercutting my thought here because the bikes below can fit reasonable rubber..

[Fixed]

1989
In perfect condition
I like my new bike way better
the past is the past now is the new now
Now is the time
Cheers

[makoti]

A classic road bike is front and center in my cycling life. Now & hopefully for a long, long time.

[tuscanyswe]

Old or relatively old steel with "new" equipment is the bikes i appreciate the most. In fact i just ordered a new frame made with sl tubing that im putting campy 11 and tubulars on.

Its a category of bike i cant do without. The total package of these bikes in terms of ride quality and feel paired with superior looks just does it for me.

I do however not enjoy the same frame with old components much at all so i prefer to have them made for regular a-headsets and modern stuff or they do not get any use.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by NHAero

You've just said it - the original post offered the opportunity to conflate road bike with vintage.
I live where the pavement is very good. The bikes that get the most miles are the Firefly with rim brakes and 25 mm tires and 11 speed STI, and the 89 Casati with rim brakes and 28 mm tires and 10 speed Campy. Both pure road bikes. Firefly low gear is 34-34, Casati is 39-29. I don't get to low gear on the FF every ride, but I sure do on the Casati.
I have a lovely Anderson stainless with discs and 37 mm tires, but it gets less use. It's what I'd be likely to take for a few days off the island, where there are far more dirt road routes.
So for me, hard to imagine not having a pure road bike.

I think we're going need to see some proof

[sg8357]

Clean39T
Lots of interesting and intriguing responses here. I think I did a disservice to my question though by saying "classic" - it seems in most peoples' minds here, that means full steel and tubulars and retro/nostalgia. It's almost easier for me to feel the pull to those. I was thinking more modern-classic I guess, from the '00s through the '10s...

My newest bikes are '03 and '05, modern to me.
If I want to ride like the good old days, I have a pukka '54 Claud Butler New All Rounder. (brake cables have been fixed, since pic)

[NHAero]

https://forums.thepaceline.net/showp...02&postcount=5

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

I think we're going need to see some proof

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by Clean39T

Lots of interesting and intriguing responses here. I think I did a disservice to my question though by saying "classic" - it seems in most peoples' minds here, that means full steel and tubulars and retro/nostalgia. It's almost easier for me to feel the pull to those. I was thinking more modern-classic I guess, from the '00s through the '10s...

For me, these bikes below are emblematic road bikes from a bygone era - they are not what is chosen for setting fast times, having the most comfortable ride, or stopping well in the wet - so why (other than affordability, obviously) would one still choose them over something newer and more modern? Is it only nostalgia, or do these do something and evoke a feeling that surpasses the feeling of being on the latest/greatest/fastest/supplest option out there?

And I'm probably undercutting my thought here because the bikes below can fit reasonable rubber..

"Another argument is that such bikes keep us connected to the heart and soul of road riding as we once knew it to be - the times when our heroes were young and we dreamed of all things Italian. Maybe the shock of small irregularities in the pavement jarring up through 23s at 100psi still serves a purpose - or of wrestling a 39x25 up a 10% grade. Maybe it connects us to the images we have of ourself on the bike - or of what it means to ride with panache, efficiency (and cartilage) be dam'd."

I caught the crux of your question. You just answered it above haven't you? Sometimes there is a schism between who we are and who we perceive ourselves to be.

I live in an area with very steep hills and crappy pavement. Not to mention lots of dirt trails. I took my Ti gravel bike (Alliance) and Ti road race bike (Firefly) out on separate rides this week. Every time, especially on the flats and descents, the Firefly was faster. (Turns out I was partially mistaken in a previous thread) Now, part of that is that the Alliance tops out at 48 in the big ring and the Firefly is a 50.

Conversely, every time out, I've enjoyed the ride more on the Alliance. So, for me, the answer is a "race comfort" bike, which is, in fact, currently being built. Able to take 32 tires, somewhat relaxed geo, and disc brakes.

I think the need for a strict race bike depends on the individual.
For AndySti, sure.
For you (based on your post), probably not.
For me, (and the vast majority of cyclists), definitely not.

[Kirk007]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

I live in an area with very steep hills and crappy pavement. Not to mention lots of dirt trails.... every time out, I've enjoyed the ride more on the Alliance.

I think this - road conditions and to a lesser extent terrain, have a lot of influence here. Our local roads are mostly chipseal and "lumpy" for lack of a better description - not so much broken pavement with gravel, just a lot of bumps everywhere. The attributes of all road bikes with wider tires tend to help make the ride a bit more relaxed here than for instance the Dgma F10. that I picked up. But if I lived say in the areas of Italy France where I've done a lot of riding, a "classic road bike" whether newfangled carbon or "old fashioned" steel with 25mm tubulars would get 90+ percent of my miles.

[paredown]

Originally Posted by Clean39T

Lots of interesting and intriguing responses here. I think I did a disservice to my question though by saying "classic" - it seems in most peoples' minds here, that means full steel and tubulars and retro/nostalgia. It's almost easier for me to feel the pull to those. I was thinking more modern-classic I guess, from the '00s through the '10s...

For me, these bikes below are emblematic road bikes from a bygone era - they are not what is chosen for setting fast times, having the most comfortable ride, or stopping well in the wet - so why (other than affordability, obviously) would one still choose them over something newer and more modern? Is it only nostalgia, or do these do something and evoke a feeling that surpasses the feeling of being on the latest/greatest/fastest/supplest option out there?

And I'm probably undercutting my thought here because the bikes below can fit reasonable rubber..

...

I could have been clearer in my response--I think I fit in the retro-modern category--new brakes/shifters/wheels because they are mostly better--but I will happily hang them on a classic steel frame and enjoy the ride. I don't really have much interest in going back to skinny tubes/box section rims and tubulars--that's for the retro grouches...

Currently--in rotation:

1990s filet brazed Simonetti (prolly Tange)--cf Time fork, quill stem, Campy 10 double

1990s lugged 853 Nobilette steel fork, quill stem, Campy 10 triple

1990s lugged Serotta CSi, F1 carbon fork, quill stem Campy 10 triple

2010(?) Look 585 full carbon Campy 10 double--fits your group of "classic" rides--and I would agree. To me it makes little difference in my ride over the steel choices

(One of the first three will likely go--if I can get clear what I like about each... All are shod in 25s now except the Nobilette since the only tubular wheels and tires are the ones that I got from you, and I haven't tried wider ones yet...)

Still missed--the Colnago CT-1 (plush!) and the Tecnos--both still 1" forks, but carbon... and they would fit into my version of "classic" as well. And the Peter Mooney--all steel, retro mod and truly a frame that hearkened back to the frames I raced on, but with something else going on as well--completely dialed. And the Nobilette reminds me of it...

The others that I shed--the Mercian 531 (skinny tubes), the Concorde EL-OS (Italian) were more like the bikes I grew up racing on--they were nice rides but I definitely had the 'been there, done that' reaction once I rode them a good bit, so they are not missed...