Does 2010 count as retro?

[JohnnyMarone]

I have a 2010 GT Force , very impressed with the ride, only problem is it was listed as a L on ebay but turned out to be a M in real life.
Anyone want to swap for a L? I wouldnt mi d selling it either, I fancy an early 2000s Scalpel with the carbon chainstays or a Rush.

 

[FluffyChicken]

Retro, well the modern gear I put on my retrobike was 2010 modern day stuff.

But hey, that's not the point hope you get what you need. Stick some pictures up

(it is 1998+ ;-))

 

[JohnnyMarone]

I will tomorrow, if anyones interested. It was in quite good nick to be fair, looks like it had hardly any use.
I took it out up and down the mountains a few times, but it was unfortunately unreconcilably cramped, just have to accept its too small which is a shame seeing as i do quite like the ride.

 

[velomaniac]

My definition of retro is a bike from the past that is no longer made. I don't agree with the idea of retro being fixed in stone and not moving forward as time progresses.

 

[JohnnyMarone]

 

[Betsy]

It's all subjective, based on what era you consider the recent past to be.. personally I wouldn't consider a bike from 2010 'retro' because 2010 seems like yesterday for me but if i was 25yrs old then certainly because 2010 would be a period remembered from childhood.

 

[JohnnyMarone]

Well, consider the bike in the photo:
26" wheels
9 speed triple,
threaded bb,
handlebars of a decent width,
tyres and tubes,
on paper not so much different from a bike from , say, 2003,
but like you I would fi nd it hard to call my GT a retro bike, I think mainly because it rides so nicely. Be nicer if it fitted me but thats a different story.

 

[MattiThundrrr]

I have been thinking about that 1998 cutoff a lot lately. Seems like it is time to move the line, at least to somewhere around 2004, when Gary's 29" Rig came out and things really started to change. However, my 2012 Hardrock is still 3*8, 26", rim brakes...

 

[FluffyChicken]

I have been thinking about that 1998 cutoff a lot lately. Seems like it is time to move the line, at least to somewhere around 2004, when Gary's 29" Rig came out and things really started to change. However, my 2012 Hardrock is still 3*8, 26", rim brakes...

It is not going to change, there is the 1998+ retro section already. So make your own cut off in your head for here (and hence this post)

Unless of course you wish to go through al the 1998+ section and move every post to the, would be rename, <=1997 section ;-)

So honestly no need to think about it. Plus search for the other couple/few/few more topics on it

 

[MattiThundrrr]

I respectfully disagree. There is definitely a need to think about it. Otherwise I have to think about non bike things. Boring. When was the 1998 date carved in stone, and has the technology used to ride over that stone changed in any way since?
Also, perhaps it is just the dynamics of this forum, but I feel that a bike posted in the 98+ section gets a lot less attention than in the other one.
I do not see enough difference, aside from the arbitrarily chosen cutoff date, between these two, for example.
One gets filed under "Retro MTB", the other under "Bikes 98+"