Have we killed RetroBike?

[Inigo Montoya]

heavn't read the whole thread but want to point out what i think about the whole "retro" thing.
retro is way too general as term to be able to pin down what is retro an what is not. retro is just "old" for most people in some sort of way.
i think the introduction of categories would help. they are fairly obvious anyway.

1.) "early days" mtbikes up to ~1989
2.) "golden era" mtbikes up to ~1997
3.) "whatever" mtbikes from ~1997 on

i have no clue how to call category three because i lost interest in mtb in ~1993. there might even be another category but as said i have no clue about 1997+.
i think the categorization would help in that people could keep using their way of the word retro. on the other hand it would give us a possibility to talk among "retro nerds" without first defining what retro is.

 

[Stick Legs]

I don't think Retrobike is in any danger of dying.

I found Retrobike a few years ago and was drawn in to the community and loved it.

Back then RB was like a Cotswold village, warm and friendly, no one group dominating, everything was balmy and sunny. However there were so few of us that it became, like all villages, a bit Cilquey and in bred.

Now RB is like a thriving market town, new bikes moving in, the old village now a historic town centre and you don't know everyones real name (which sadly I virtually once did!).

One day in many years there will be be an out of town shopping centre of 2003-> bikes.

Many people like to be one of the few, that's fine but RB is too broad a church for that, and I think it is a good thing.

 

[drystonepaul]

I only discovered Retrobike a few months ago while I was searching for some spare parts for one of my older bikes. I just wanted to keep it working and riding. It's still a nice bike that I just happen to have had for a few years. I'd never really considered it to be 'retro' before.
The word 'retro' is a rather vague and far too all encompassing label in my opinion, but I suppose I'd struggle to come up with anything better.

Anyway, what this site has done is enable me to unlock memories of the bikes, the rides, the bits, the places and the people I've been lucky enough to have experienced over past 20 or so years of biking.
It's difficult not to get nostalgic when one has access to such a vibrant. detailed and accurate resource that makes up this site.
It's also helped me come full circle and once again possess my first proper mountain bike (a 1991 GT Karakaram Elite), which I picked up two days ago on eBay. Thanks to a tip off on this site.
Having spent several hours stripping down, cleaning and rebuilding, I have made one of those memories all the more tangible.
If anything this site and this community of like minded people has helped me appreciate and value my bikes and what they mean to me all the more.
That has to be a good thing.

Long live Retrobike!

 

[Kestonian]

Re: Classic

The low and mid end stuff has a place here too. Long live Halfords, Townsend, Falcon, Kona etc. etc.

If I'm not mistaken, the original by line for Readers' Bikes was something along the lines of "Post your bike up here, even if it's a Raleigh Mustang"

Snobbishness aside (guilty as an owner, not guilty as a cyclist) I think that RB has really increased my awareness of the breadth of bikes and the depth of interest. For all the fancy bikes I might have owned, I bet that someone, somewhere has ridden further, harder, higher and faster on a Raleigh Mustang and with a big grin on their face.

I like the village analogy.

 

[Stick Legs]

Thank you.

 

[cchris2lou]

Thank you.

back with a bang pete .

glad to see you back .

 

[Stick Legs]

Things are getting simpler, so more time for bikeage!

I have sold the Pace, many reasons but mostly due to the fact that although it was beautiful it did not suit my riding, too focused, too 'race'.

I am working on another project though, don't worry, and will be here a lot more too now.

Need a 1993-1994 steel steed, thinking Shogun Prarie Breaker. Something unusual.