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

[Routewerks]

wrong spot, sorry

[bicycletricycle]

I have not had a traditional road bike in a long time. I am tempted on a weekly basis to pick one up but I am not sure if I would choose to ride it over all my other more comfortable bikes (bigger tires, gearing, storage). I do feel a longing for one, I spent so much time riding bikes like that in the past.

[Kirk007]

Yes.


Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

[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.

[EPOJoe]

Oh, man...can't get enough classic road bike.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[OtayBW]

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.

Wondering what constitutes 'vintage'. I ride a 15 yo Serotta Legend Ti and a Peg Responsium, neither of which I would call vintage. I WOULD place them in a 'traditional' geometry arena. I've got a BMC SLC01 road in CF - neither vintage nor traditional. Finally, I have a De Rosa Primato which classifies as both, and which stacks up in many ways against any of them in terms of performance and thrill.

[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