New bikes

[Jamesl94]

Ok, little bit of a rant...



I went into my LBS today to check out a new bike, something to ride over the winter. I was equipped with £500 in my pocket, ready to release it all to the hands of the convincing salesman.

Why didn't I? Well, upon my quest for my new steed, I noticed a few things about these bikes, nearly every single one of them was black with red detail, or red with black detail. I appreciate carbon raw is black, but aluminum bikes where painted matte black, aswell.

We all know you can't judge a book by it's cover, so I rode one of the bikes on test (this was £1k's worth of bike, mind) and upon riding back to the shop and being asked my opinion of the bike, the only words I could come up with where 'yeah, it rides ok'.

With classic racers you get a 'presence' of a bike, you can see the quality and craftsmanship flowing throughout the whole bike, example:

new stems:

Is it just me that feels as though newer bikes have no beauty at all to them? Not even a little bit? I could spend hours and hours looking at classic racers, I walked out the shop within 10 minuets, I was bored.

I'm 18 so classic racers don't have a nostalgic value connected to them!



James

 

[Chuck moo]

Completely agree. And I work in a bike shop

 

[bm0p700f]

Some modern bike have no style some do. If you want style and presance start with a bare frame and build from there.

There were plenty of older bikes that ride O.K too. Plenty of old bikes look like a dogs dinner as well just like new ones. The main problem with modern bikes so few are designed to take proper mudguards and still be a race/sudax bike. There are a few but that to me is winter bike.

 

[Spokesmann]

Most modern stuff has no aesthetic appeal at all. Period. I simply detest the modern style of straight forks, the huge chunky frames with angled top tubes, garish tasteless graphics (I am a qualified graphic designer and even I dont like them) and even more the horrible deep rimmed wheels. It seems very few manufacturers can make a bike that is both technologically advanced and aesthetically pleasing to the eye*. Im sorry but the beautiful lines of yesteryear bikes has been well and truly buried. Im sticking to steel.

*I'd love to see this combination.

 

[vivelesalpes]

Whatever the brand, most low end modern bikes come out of the same factory in South East Asia - that's why the frames look the same.

 

[NeilM]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess.

I like the style of some modern bikes, I don't quite see where many thousands of pounds is going, but there are some very cool looking bikes out there.

There are a couple of companies now starting to produce new 'retro' bikes, whethere these will just pay aesthetic lip service to the past, or whether they will be decent bikes has yet to be seen. I was contemplating a titanium framed Genesis, but I am hearing it can be a harsh ride, which is the last thing I want.

For the best combination of old meets new, then a custom frame is always an option, and there were some jaw dropping examples at Bespoked last year, just visit the gallery on their web site to see what I mean; the 2013 SRAM equipped Reynolds 853 framed Rourke was a thing of stunning beauty.

 

[daccordimark]

You're spot on James, the modern bike is all about stiffness, stealth and machismo. As Spokesmann says the beauty just isn't there these days. It just isn't possible with moulded carbon and rarely achieved with welded aluminium.

My modern bike is plain ugly on the whole, the saving graces being a 2004 Chorus chainset, 2011 model Veloce mechs and a rather nice Genetic Heritage seatpost. These are all silver and styled pretty much like components of old. Oh and the wheels are silver box section rims on traditional looking Campag hubs. The bike serves as commuter, weekend bike and occasional racer so I forgive the ugly bits because it performs very well in all those roles.

If my late surge of racing interest takes off next season I'll ditch the current bike in favour of something carbon, ugly and "racey" plus go back to a nice steel frame with classic (looking) components for the commute and general weekend stuff.

Both of those bikes will be tools to get the job done but only one of them will be a thing of beauty.

Mark.

 

[FINNEY1973]

I sit in both camps on this one - I ride a carbon road bike as well as a number of steel framed steeds. Why carbon? it's quick, comfy and in my eyes looks pretty sweet else I wouldn't have bought it.

Why steel? because I appreciate the workmanship, enjoy the ride equally as much as my carbon and also think they can be equally if not more beautiful.

If I had funds but could only have one bike to buy I'd be scratching my head for months on end.

an RB1000 in black on black: http://gear11.blogspot.co.uk/2010/12/mc ... rb800.html

or one of these: http://italiancyclingjournal.blogspot.c ... rsary.html

too tough to call in my eyes as they tick many a box.

 

[Iwasgoodonce]

Mmmm, interesting. I'm thinking of a new bike. I just don't know about carbon. I'm not sure if my brain is ready for 'plastic' yet. I have maybe a bit more to spend but am in a similar quandary.

Am I depriving myself in not getting state of the art? Should I go for a carbon super bike? I don't really want another new steel bike as I'm fed up with the whole rust thing.

I wondered about titanium and really like the Legend bikes made in Italy. Does anyone have any experience of them?

 

[ed_de_ball]

Snap Jamesl94. The big 'Five O' is looming and have some cash to spend. I might just do this frame up instead......