Pre 1997 date, how did that come about

[Guinessisgoodforyou]

Because we've always done it this way and of course there's no room for improvement

 

[d8mok]

But why split it (other than to say '98-08 and '08+)? This is the problem with cyclists everywhere; they're cliquey and want to believe the their clique is the one true important one. I ride road, DH, trail, in the mountains, on dirt jumps and occasionally the BMX too. I ride bikes of all sorts, all ages and in all places and have dug and repaired my fair share of trails. I like old bikes and I like new bikes. And I don't mean this as ill will towards anyone, but the more you divide the closer you get to a group of one and you end up with greater and greater insularity. Why would mid '00's stuff ruin RB? When I joined RB in 2007 the 1998+ section was the equivalent of 2016+ today. Why does one person's rose tinted glasses count for more than another's, and what exactly do you think would ruin the site? I mean this as a genuine question because I just don't understand your issue with that. I've been riding MTBs (of sorts, a 20" Ned Overend replica) since 1992 when I was 7 years old, and therefore my era is from the period I started reading MBUK avidly which was around '95. Do I like looking at earlier stuff? Sure. Is it my main interest? Not really. MTBs only really came into existence in the early eighties, especially commercially, and doubly so in the UK. So I've been riding MTBs for more than 75% of the existence of the sport. Yet apparently most of that isn't retro enough. I think what you actually want is 'Retrobike, the first ten years only'.

I'm on quite a few car forums and cliques always kill them, every single time. The successful ones are where there are sections and if you're not interested in that section then you just don't look at it. Into classic cars? Great. Into racing classic cars? Great. Into rallying classic cars? Also great. Want to just maintain it? Great. Want to modify it heavily with engine and driveline swaps? That's great too. Want pre-war? Awesome. Want post-war? Wonderful. Want modern classics like the stuff you saw in the eighties? 'Man, my dad had one of those when I was a kid'. Want nineties? 'Shit, I'm getting old, I remember when that was the latest thing, but that's really cool'. We all enjoy our hobbies in different ways, surely a site that doesn't cater for the latest marketing nonsense and instead is of interesting bikes that people have had in the past, restored or just always fancied is sufficient. There's more that unites us than divides us and yet, as humans the world over love to do, the focus is on the minutiae of difference to make it a wedge.

There isn’t a divide though. The forum is retrobike but also has a 98 plus section for anyone that wishes to post the modern stuff (including me as I’ve 7 modern bikes too)

If you make a forum too broad , you loose the meaning and members simply leave as they get bored of content they aren’t interested in.

Dedicated forums to a niche will always flourish.

 

[FluffyChicken]

Because we've always done it this way and of course there's no room for improvement

That's modern talk that! not for this site. Stick to the tried and tested.

 

[Vesatoro]

There isn’t a divide though. The forum is retrobike but also has a 98 plus section for anyone that wishes to post the modern stuff (including me as I’ve 7 modern bikes too)

If you make a forum too broad , you loose the meaning and members simply leave as they get bored of content they aren’t interested in.

Dedicated forums to a niche will always flourish.

If you make a forum too broad? I think this forum is as broad as it can ever be, and nobody has suggested to broaden it. Everything can be posted under 98->. It's just discussion if we should have more dedicated subforums for different eras of vintage/retro/old mountain bikes. To separate them from modern bikes. Yes, 1998 bike is not a modern mountain bike anymore, even if it maybe was 10-15 years ago. I think yes we should. And to have a separate subforum to true modern mountain bikes too.

 

[d8mok]

If you make a forum too broad? I think this forum is as broad as it can ever be, and nobody has suggested to broaden it. Everything can be posted under 98->. It's just discussion if we should have more dedicated subforums for different eras of vintage/retro/old mountain bikes. To separate them from modern bikes. Yes, 1998 bike is not a modern mountain bike anymore, even if it maybe was 10-15 years ago. I think yes we should. And to have a separate subforum to true modern mountain bikes too.

Yes they have. It’s retrobike which is for bikes that are retro with small sub sections for other stuff.

No need to make the forum cover lots of other areas. Use pinkbike or others if that’s your bag.

 

[Vesatoro]

Yes they have. It’s retrobike which is for bikes that are retro with small sub sections for other stuff.

No need to make the forum cover lots of other areas. Use pinkbike or others if that’s your bag.

How welcoming, constructive and adult comment.

It really is not. My own cut year is 1998. But I would love to see the love for old mountain bikes to gather around one site, than to spread to different forums. The hype of vintage mountain bikes has declined after corona years, and will continue to do so, as we are getting older. It would be wonderful (to me) if younger generations would find their place at here (somewhere else than the general 98+ subforum) when they start to build their teen dreams of say 98...08 bikes in the coming years. Otherwise, I think this forum will practically die in about ten years. Would be shame.

 

[hawkhill97]

It would be wonderful (to me) if younger generations would find their place at here (somewhere else than the general 98+ subforum) when they start to build their teen dreams of say 98...08 bikes in the coming years.

Totally agree - that's what it's all about!

Agnostic over whether a separate subforum is required for this... I guess 1998- 2014ish (was that roughly when 26" stopped being a thing?) could make sense, and have a modern forum for 27.5"/29" 1x12 LLS shenanigans.

 

[Cloverleaf]

Yes they have. It’s retrobike which is for bikes that are retro with small sub sections for other stuff.

No need to make the forum cover lots of other areas. Use pinkbike or others if that’s your bag.

That comes back to the insularity though by saying 'go away', just as your statement of (paraphrasing), 'go and set up your own forum elsewhere if you don't want to talk about stuff that's at least 26 years old', even though when that forum was set up it was only 7 years old (and maybe less). Categories and sub forums are ideal for different interests within the general theme of retro (i.e old) bikes which I take to be 'old shit we're sentimentally attached to for a multitude of reasons that's otherwise a bit rubbish but we still love it'. I mean seriously, a twenty year old DH bike is absolutely retro. Everything about it is inferior to a modern bike (tick), it's a sentimental piece of equipment (tick), you can't buy spares for it easily (tick), has random bespoke/crap 'standards' parts that haven't been available for several decades (tick) and if you turned up to a trail somewhere not a single person would have a clue what it was (tick). We're all loving old bikes, it's just some people want to say 'my kind of old is better than your kind of old'. A bit like the Judean people's front sketch which is still relevant fifty years later, much like another one they did in the same location...

As to the pinkbike point, those forums are toxic as shit with a bunch of kids being the main clientele. Despite differing interests within the hobby of 'old shit' most people here are, by and large, mature adults capable of having interesting and insightful conversations.

I agree wholeheartedly with everything you said (including about the cars )
But the bit I quoted rang more bells than anything else, if you don't mind I'd like to use that in my sig as a personal reminder

Not sure anyone's ever thought anything I've written worth quoting before but go for it!

But doesn't sections make it cliquey, because they're split

Not at all. Do you cut off friends who have interests other than just the ones you share? Sections simply allow people to discuss their specific, sometimes peculiar interests and focus on reading the topics that cater to them. Let's be honest, until the last five years or so MTBs have absolutely not been a 'trendy' pastime so trying to split up an already niche element (old bikes) within a niche (bikes) just creates an unnecessary divide. Far better to have one vibrant and well frequented forum which has a few different categories with varying overlaps than a bunch of single interest boards with two people having back and forth arguments (and make no mistake, a forum with two members would still lead to arguments).

----

At the end of the day we all like 'old' bikes, some older than others, and some riders/members being older than others too which means different world views (especially with the clearly wide ranging socio-economic backgrounds too). I have bikes from 95 up to modern day and I like them all but technologically and reliability wise the modern ones trump the old ones, and those old ones span several decades. Do I need to be a member to at least three different forums to discuss them? Do I bollocks, I just won't bother contributing to any forums if that's the case because life is too short and already complex enough as it is. I'll just focus on riding my stuff and keeping it to myself; hence one less active member on an existing forum. Does one member mean anything? Of course not, but multiple people feeling that way, while failing to then generate new members because of a gate-keeping attitude, will inevitably lead to a forum dying. I can point to a huge number of forums I've frequented over the years which have disappeared because a few vocal members have wanted to make the place more and more specific and more insular, and less welcoming to new members. A pub which doesn't replace the drinkers who leave or die soon shuts its doors.

 

[Cloverleaf]

Totally agree - that's what it's all about!

Agnostic over whether a separate subforum is required for this... I guess 1998- 2014ish (was that roughly when 26" stopped being a thing?) could make sense, and have a modern forum for 27.5"/29" 1x12 LLS shenanigans.

My cut would be eleven speed (so 2012ish I think, I really should know as I wrote an article on the first 11spd SRAM launch) rather than 26 as 29s existed before for quite a while, but then so did 1x drivetrains so it's all individual to our own lens. Josh was the last DH World Cup winner on a 26" bike in 2014. 29 was around for a while before that but as more of a niche item, while those who missed the 29 bandwagon pushed 27.5 for a few years until front mechs died and allowed the 29s to properly challenge 27s on handling stakes. That said a mullet (i.e a 29F/27R) will still corner harder than a full 29 if you ride smoother, faster turns like at a bike park. Break a category down too much and it has zero interest so I'd even say 1998-2008 wouldn't be particularly off kilter, after all 2008 was still 16, nearly 17 years ago!

 

[d8mok]

That comes back to the insularity though by saying 'go away', just as your statement of (paraphrasing), 'go and set up your own forum elsewhere if you don't want to talk about stuff that's at least 26 years old', even though when that forum was set up it was only 7 years old (and maybe less). Categories and sub forums are ideal for different interests within the general theme of retro (i.e old) bikes which I take to be 'old shit we're sentimentally attached to for a multitude of reasons that's otherwise a bit rubbish but we still love it'. I mean seriously, a twenty year old DH bike is absolutely retro. Everything about it is inferior to a modern bike (tick), it's a sentimental piece of equipment (tick), you can't buy spares for it easily (tick), has random bespoke/crap 'standards' parts that haven't been available for several decades (tick) and if you turned up to a trail somewhere not a single person would have a clue what it was (tick). We're all loving old bikes, it's just some people want to say 'my kind of old is better than your kind of old'. A bit like the Judean people's front sketch which is still relevant fifty years later, much like another one they did in the same location...

As to the pinkbike point, those forums are toxic as shit with a bunch of kids being the main clientele. Despite differing interests within the hobby of 'old shit' most people here are, by and large, mature adults capable of having interesting and insightful conversations.


Not sure anyone's ever thought anything I've written worth quoting before but go for it!


Not at all. Do you cut off friends who have interests other than just the ones you share? Sections simply allow people to discuss their specific, sometimes peculiar interests and focus on reading the topics that cater to them. Let's be honest, until the last five years or so MTBs have absolutely not been a 'trendy' pastime so trying to split up an already niche element (old bikes) within a niche (bikes) just creates an unnecessary divide. Far better to have one vibrant and well frequented forum which has a few different categories with varying overlaps than a bunch of single interest boards with two people having back and forth arguments (and make no mistake, a forum with two members would still lead to arguments).

----

At the end of the day we all like 'old' bikes, some older than others, and some riders/members being older than others too which means different world views (especially with the clearly wide ranging socio-economic backgrounds too). I have bikes from 95 up to modern day and I like them all but technologically and reliability wise the modern ones trump the old ones, and those old ones span several decades. Do I need to be a member to at least three different forums to discuss them? Do I bollocks, I just won't bother contributing to any forums if that's the case because life is too short and already complex enough as it is. I'll just focus on riding my stuff and keeping it to myself; hence one less active member on an existing forum. Does one member mean anything? Of course not, but multiple people feeling that way, while failing to then generate new members because of a gate-keeping attitude, will inevitably lead to a forum dying. I can point to a huge number of forums I've frequented over the years which have disappeared because a few vocal members have wanted to make the place more and more specific and more insular, and less welcoming to new members. A pub which doesn't replace the drinkers who leave or die soon shuts its doors.

It’s crazy isn’t it. People come to a site called “retrobike” to talk about retrobikes.

I actively promote retrobike to people interested in our hobby and massively go out my way to help folk gain knowledge on bikes I know a bit about. Hoping to spark their interest and build our hobby.


You didn’t have a hand in the latest jaguar re-brand did you?