Pre 1997 date, how did that come about

[bikeworkshop]

“Down with this sort of thing!”

What do we want?
Retro-bikes
When do we want them?
Before 1997!

 

[FluffyChicken]

In all honesty I've never understood the MTB/road/1997/1998 division. I actually think it's complete bollocks. Do you ride? Yes. Welcome fellow cyclist. So simple.
We are a brother/sisterhood, demarcations weaken us. As the old adage "United we stand, divided we fall"

But it is a RetroBike site and that was the point.
Keeping the shite modern stuff away for Retrobike enthusiasts.

It is not a GeneralRideAllTheStuffBike forum.
And that's what the rest of the Internet was for.

Plus John said and he's the boss.

 

[Guinessisgoodforyou]

But it is a RetroBike site and that was the point.
Keeping the shite modern stuff away for Retrobike enthusiasts.

It is not a GeneralRideAllTheStuffBike forum.
And that's what the rest of the Internet was for.

Plus John said and he's the boss.

Read what I wrote. I said nothing about modern.

 

[Takingabreak]

I'm kinda thinking that Retrobike should go back to it's roots by having an overall cut off of 2005, keeping the 97 cut off but having the 98 onwards only going as far as about 2005.

 

[d8mok]

If it was 1998 , people would say “why 98?” And so on.

I do think that 98/99 bikes should be included as they still mostly used the same tech.

For me 97 is my favourite year of bikes (followed by 94).

98 it did start to go downhill a bit for some brands whilst others really took off. The scene totally changed though.

97 likely was chosen as that was retro when the site was built. As now in 2024 anything pre 2007 is kinda retro now

 

[Guinessisgoodforyou]

The veteran motorcycle club uses the 25 year rule for vintage. So 1999 would be eligible, next year 2000 and so on. Not saying it's the way forward, just another way of looking at it.

 

[bikeworkshop]

Let's ban aluminium.
And more than 9 on the back.

 

[Takingabreak]

Let's ban aluminium.
And more than 9 on the back.

did you say ban anything with less than three on the front?

 

[BerthaPog]

Let's ban aluminium.
And more than 9 on the back.

Well thats me screwed, with a ‘98 Ku running 2x10 and v’s.

But I do have an ‘02 Orange running 3x9 and hydraulic discs.

 

[Cloverleaf]

I'm kinda thinking that Retrobike should go back to it's roots by having an overall cut off of 2005, keeping the 97 cut off but having the 98 onwards only going as far as about 2005.

Thing is, the '97 cut off was only ten years old (or perhaps not even that) when this site started so '05 would still be older than the youngest bikes were that got discussed at the start. If it's not current I'd say it's in as a general rule otherwise it just becomes another cliquey, 'your face doesn't fit' site, and in five years everyone will be wondering why the site's dead (and the answer will be because you've chased away all the potential newcomers). Personally I think '95/96 is probably the changeover between old-retro stuff and mid-retro, almost pre and post Shimano M950 as an example. Before that point full suspension was predominantly poor and after that they started to become marginally more reliable and real world useable. You then have another step change around '10 for trail stuff where they really were significantly more reliable. The '97 cut off seems as sensible as any IMO as, like all of these things, it's very subjective based on your own experience and critical time points. In time I guess '98-'08 becomes a segment and then newer stuff it's own category, but at the end of the day a cool bike is a cool bike and if you're after some parts you know what you're after.