"Form Over Function" or "Function Over Form&q

[IbocProSX]

Why not get ride of the risers and just put on a stem with a bit more rise???

I'm guilty of the riser and bar-ends offence too and the reason is they both serve a purpose. The barends allow me to shift weight forward when climbing and adopt a stretched out position on fast flat sections. The risers offer fine tuning of the riding position by rotating the bars in the stem clamp.

I guess such an argument should put me firmly in the function over form camp. Yet I hesitate, as I am also guilty of fitting parts "for pictures only". Sad but true :roll: (is this the retrobike efect?)

But I stuck with function over form in the end.

 

[losidan]

i'm a looks tart....

 

[RockyMountainHigh]

Build your bike up to fit yourself for your own needs and likes and to heck with what anyone else thinks. Back in the early 90's the "industry" labled the dude from Bridgestone a "Retro Grouch" because he spec'd bikes with thumb shifters when the "Industry" went with trigger shifters. Dare to be different! Take a look at Rivendell bikes some time to see what that old "Retro Grouch" is doing these days.

Bar ends on risers are not "wrong" unless your building up a bike to win the BOTM popularity contest. Are you going to ride the darn thing or stand there and look at it!

IMO there is nothing wrong with building up a show bike to just look at...but don't throw stones at those with a different agenda.

The fact that we're all into older mountain bikes kinda makes us all nonconforming Retro Grouchs so act accordingly. The reason I'm into older bikes is I became less and less into the direction the "industry" was going.

 

[hamster]

Can we just put that last posting as a sticky? I think it should sum up the ethos here.

 

[DM]

Form. Usually.

Different courses; Different horses.
Or something.

I've [BRIEFLY] used the "risers and bar ends" combo on a touring bike. It gives lots of comfortable and useful positions over long distances. A touring bike rarely looks cool, anyway. The bar ends were removed immediately after my touring ended. And none of my mates saw me riding it

There is a certain aesthetic logic that dictates form:
* Retro MTBs should have flat bars (appropriate-era bar ends optional).
* Klunkers should have wide and wacky cruiser bars or vintage Moto-X bars.

In general, the "risers and bar ends" combo ignores that aesthetic logic and is therefore very WRONG.

But, as somebody already said: with the bizarre modern "antlers" that are being produced by some companies (Jones, Black Sheep etc.) the "risers and bar ends" combo is starting to look like a minor aesthetic misdemeanor.

 

[lumos2000]

In general, the "risers and bar ends" combo ignores that aesthetic logic and is therefore very WRONG.

understand what you mean but i ride my bikes not look at them. i suppose it depends on the reason your building the bike in the first place. there are some really nice looking bikes on this site but im not sure they would make the most comfortable of rides.

 

[Inigo Montoya]

my apologies to all the riserbars & barends riders. i didn't wanted this to be the big topic on this thread. we had that somewhere else anyway afaik.
my sole intention was the get an idea in which order the community ranks form and function.
and i think my personal statement is due. for me form comes first (surprise ) nowadays. when i was a kid function was king. but while building up my retro bikes i realized that esthetics beats performance on the priority list. how else could i justify manitou 2 forks on my arc and cantis on all my builds?

 

[lumos2000]

no apologies needed it makes good banter

 

[GoldenEraMTB]

function over form always gets my vote.