Retro bikes versus New bikes. (Have bikes really improved?)

[GrahamJohnWallace]

come on, surely you don't think the klunkers of old can out-perform the latest designed full suspension thoroughbred?? also the comparison you're making would have to be an even one.. if you pitched a great old bike up against a bad new bike then that evens up the odds considerably, but on an even-field you'd be carrying your old bike home in pieces,

be the first guy to rip a world cup downhill course on an old klunker, you'd probably be the last as well

My belief is that their are some great features and characteristics of old bikes that the modern designers have missed. Though you would be hard pressed to find these on an old klunker.

These features should have entered the mainstream of bike design but for some reason they have been overlooked. For instance tyres designed specifically to run at low pressures that have better grip, improved comfort, and sink less into soft ground. Trials motorbikes have used such tyres for decades and I am sure that modern materials technologies could be used to solve the weight problems of traditional low pressure tyres.

On Saturday I met up with Joe Breeze and showed him my 1983 Cleland.
Despite knowing of the Clelands existance for 30years he had not seen one before. He was impressed by the number of innovative features and how ahead of its time it was in terms of both its design and its engineering. There was however one frame design detail that Joe was so impressed by that he talked of incorporating it into his 2011 Breezers. Due to reasons of commercial confidentiality I won't discuss the details here. But this feature has been copied before and is so simple and logical that, when modern designers see it, they will kick themselves as to why they didn't think of it before.

I believe that retro bikes are a rich gene pool of design and engineering ideas, both good and bad. Some of these will one day become the next new thing in mountain biking.

It is very difficult for modern designers to think of novel, alternative ways of doing things. Modern designers fit hydraulic disk brakes on their top of the range bikes. It's what their customers expect, another hand me down from motor bike design. however you don't need the braking forces of heavy motorbike to stop a lightweight bicycle, and the linear relation between the piston in the lever and the piston in the caliper is the opposite of what is needed for good modulation. The better brake designs use smaller pistons in the levers but this still does not give gradual increase in mechanical advantage required for the optimum modulation and so braking without locking the wheels. The results of my research into disk break design are clear. Cable operated disk brakes have far better modulation than hydraulics. This is because the initial cable stretch removes the linear relationship between the brake lever and caliper movements. By swaping hydraulic, for cable operated disk brakes I have significantly improved the controlled breaking characteristics of one of
my bikes.

Does this mean that cable operated disk brakes will start appearing on top of the range bikes?

Of course not!

But only when they invent mechanical add-ones to modulate hydraulic brakes, will people realise how overrated current hydraulic brakes are.

 

[Neil G]

Many a reference to 'performance' within this debate... it's worth considering one's real meaning of performance expected from the device(s) in question. I, looking backwards with this hobby, expect nostalgia, differentiation, satisfaction and challenge, each time I open a box containing a twenty year old frame. In this regard, retro bikes deliver wholly and fully in a way a contemporary offering will never do (for me).

Do I want to ride a lap faster at MM by buying a contemporary machine - no, that has no appeal whatsoever. I do feel the need to want to pay modern prices for the reduction of 2 or 3 minutes - on the contrary, my older bikes extend the value and the challenge! BTW - I believe modern XC courses are a pale shadow of the courses we used to ride - not because of bikes and rider capability, but because of organiser liability.

Maybe if you factor outright human 'competitiveness' into your performance mix, the value of a new machine changes - I suspect most of us are not of the elite category, so what's a few minutes traded against all the other factors that make up the broader 'performance'?! Here, btw, is where we get thrills in chasing down poorer/unfit riders who have mistakenly IMHO invested in modern bikes...they would get beter value by learning/training on £150 retro bike before they blow £2000 on a modern!

Incidentally, I think that contemporary machines distance the rider from the feel and the direct sensation of the terrain. Yes, travelling faster; yes, in more 'comfort' (if you wanted comfort you wouldn't be MTBing!); and yes, accidents incrementally more serious at higher speeds. The only two apsects of modern bicycles that hold my interest are the general advancement of the breed (although there has never been a repeat of the supremely fertile period circa 1990-1992 - see particularly the MTB shows in Anaheim); and the notion that a more comfortable bike would save energy, therefore be useful for longer distances. Sadly, I don't do or have the time for all day rides, so even that performance advancement is of questionable value to me.

Lastly, think from the angle of the modern customer and the modern bicycle enterprise. Growth is everything in business - to grow you have to win new customers and also retain them - to do that, you must make customers' products obsolete as soon as you dare! Hence the mix of bogus and real advancements that annually come to market. A great example of this would be the elevated stays explosion in 1990 - virtually every manufacturer jumped that bandwagon in short order (without product testing in most cases) and now considered a poort concept, they represent excellent 'performance' to me - cheap, weirdly nostalgic, hard and thrilling to ride fast - welcome to the performance and value-led world of the retro biker!

Mr K

I couldn't agree more about MTB courses now...most are very unchallenging, maybe it's due to the increase in road riders moving over to mountainbiking?

 

[tintin40]

quote="mrkawasaki"]


Incidentally, I think that contemporary machines distance the rider from the feel and the direct sensation of the terrain. Yes, travelling faster; yes, in more 'comfort' (if you wanted comfort you wouldn't be MTBing
Mr K[/quote]

glad i'm not the only one thinking this.