Is this retro?

[makster]

Its all about what YOU think is retro. For me its anything pre 91, as thats when I stopped riding on a regular basis.
I missed suspension, v-brakes, discs etc and then stumbled across this place while looking for info on an old Cannodale I'd bought to use for work.
Now I've got far too many bikes/parts, so beware

Welcome to the forum by the way!

 

[FMJ]

some people think pre disc brakes. some think pre v's.

These are retro in my book.

 

[6.5x55]

I don't understand why people register if they don't know why they're here

Sarky pants - it was a perfectly legit question .

FMJ - they are awesome and definitely retro. What the heck are they??

 

[JeRkY]

Indeed, Maksters tastes and mine differ quite dramatically, he probably views my fleet with suspicion and only whilst waving a crucifix in its general direction.

I do think most people on here will find it difficult to view anything made this millenium as retro, as we all tend to be of a certain age where our "golden" years refer to a period of time from mid 80's to mid 90's thats not to say we all fit into that box, and nor do all our bikes.

I am currently seeking a Pace RC300 frame, made in 2000 onwards I think, alot of people will view it as modern, my view is that it is retro due to the manufacturing process which was unique to Pace (externall butted square tubes) and no longer exists. Also it is a limited evolution of the RC200 series.

Have a look at the current bike of the month thread for a bit of a view on the ongoing debate on what is retro. Downhill is a branch of the sport we all love that developed over time, but what constitutes a retro downhill bike... go too far back and you essentially have XC bikes being ridden downhill, too far forwards and you have 25 million feet of travel front and back with a side order of hydroformed tubes and modern drive systems.

There is no black, there is no white, just opinions and the size of the crowd voicing them.

 

[JeRkY]

Oh as for a Pace RC200, obviously dependant on condition, frames go for between £250 & £400 on average. The forks for a really good set should budget upto £100. Later RC200's (post F4) are more suited to RC36's which wont cost a great deal more.

RC100 frames tend to cost more, the last one on ebay fetched 995 euro's but was in exceptional condition and with its rigid RC30 forks original stem and cranks.

 

[MCsanandreas]

some people think pre disc brakes. some think pre v's.[/quote]

Mountain Cycle had pro-stop disc brakes on the original San Andreas in 1992 so it must be pre92?

 

[FMJ]

FMJ - they are awesome and definitely retro. What the heck are they??

Hopes

 

[Easy_Rider]

some people think pre disc brakes. some think pre v's.

These are retro in my book.

Damn right, are they yours? They will be 1991 right?

 

[cybertrophic]

I think people misunderstood me...

I'm not saying my Giant has to be "retro" - in fact, given how little thi gs have moved on, it's still totally modern. What I wanted to know is, if a ten year old bike is not retro over just its age, whilst a newer bike can be because the company went bust or because of what it's made of, then we're not talking retro, it's more like the current london fashion for steel single-speeds - purely based on nostalgia and some consensus of what a "classic" bike is, regardless of it's age - a Schwinn Cruiser can be new but is about as retro as it can be, though. I guess people actually mean "nostalgic".

 

[perry]

This is sounding like a case of retro rider with a not particularly retro bike ; you don't have to own a bike made before a certain date with certain criteria fitting bits to be here . There's a little bit of " my idea of retro is 199- " but were a good bunch , a lot of people also have fairly new bikes so don't worry about it .

It's the rider not the bike .

I want to know what kind of prize or sum of money you will receive by having your bike certified retro by this site

Or is it a certificate to win over the ladies ?