Retro Build: Bling vs. Manufacturer Spec

[We_are_Stevo]

Agree with GEM's 80's vibe, but certainly not into 'bling' for the sake of it; certain parts look better on certain builds IMO.

Never been a fan of Zaskars but there's a recent thread on one that is bare alu and decal'less (at present) which just seems to tick all the boxes; I like the bare frame but many of the finished builds don't seem to do it justice. This one is 'uncomplicated' and allows the eye to concentrate on the important aspects of the frames inherent beauty.

The same can be said for some 'bling' built bikes on here; unless they're subtley realised they end looking like an explosion in a catalogue store room.

A little touch of the right coloured ano can accentuate a build; a little more tips it over into garishness. Middleburn cranks with 'red, white, and blue' rings finish off one build perfectly; or look like an afterthought on another.

Drilled Cook Bros cranks can look astounding on the right build if they are the 'focal point' but look like scrap if the combination of components doesn't 'blend.'

Then, of course, you have Ameybrooks Yeti...

...a catagory all of its own!

I wouldn't want one myself but I could hang a pic of that on the wall

Guess it all just boils down to individual personal preferences in the end??

PS: Don't understand the love-fest for Paces myself either, but Ringos RC500 is the definitive build; another eye-watering work of art...

 

[yeti-man]

you can build retro-bling - (stay tuned...)

 

[dbmtb]

Let's face it, period correct bling was usually pretty OTT. Most of the "adapted to modern sensibilities" period correct bling builds are actually "period incorrect" as they don't hurt your eyes. I don't remember seeing a single bike BITD with bling on it that didn't have a colour clash somewhere.

What I'd say is do what YOU want. OK you might never win BOTM - but I probably never will either. Go with your gut and what YOU like.

What everyone else thinks is irrelevant.

This of course does not apply to the laws of Yorkshire square.

 

[yeti-man]

...This of course does not apply to the laws of Yorkshire square.

... and lets not forget the self promoting band of brothers...

 

[KDM]

My bikes normally work on the Four stage system.

(1) Totally period correct.
(2) As original parts wear out then either correct replacements or subtle updates.
(3) It's a keeper so bling as you feel you want but kep as many original parts you take off as resale could suffer from the personal taste.
(4) It's so modern that who cares what I put on it

 

[unkleGsif]

Either, doesnt matter....

Bikes are meant to be ridden, so ride them...
Pictures are meant to be hung on a wall

Build your bike how you want... upgrade it how you want

Personally, I view my bike as being one, continual evolution from when I got it in 1997 when it was a stock Marin Palisades (the grey and chrome one), which I slowly upgraded with XT and XTR parts keeping just the frame and bars until the frame cracked. Then I replaced the frame only with an interim 2000 Hahanna which then was replaced permanantly with a 2001 Kilauea.... however, as most of the parts have been on all 3 frames, I see it as one long evolution of the same bike

Thats just me tho.... each to their own as they see fit.. just ride them

G

 

[We_are_Stevo]

Triggers broom??

 

[unkleGsif]

Triggers broom??

exactly

G

 

[Neil G]

I a big fan of full groupsets especially if it's good stuff like DX, XT or XTR

Some bling is okay on certain bikes i.e Cooks Bros cranks on Fats and Syncros on Rockys but a lot of it (kooka for instance) is just not my cuppa.

 

[isitafox]

Either, doesnt matter....

Bikes are meant to be ridden, so ride them...
Pictures are meant to be hung on a wall

Build your bike how you want... upgrade it how you want

Personally, I view my bike as being one, continual evolution from when I got it in 1997 when it was a stock Marin Palisades (the grey and chrome one), which I slowly upgraded with XT and XTR parts keeping just the frame and bars until the frame cracked. Then I replaced the frame only with an interim 2000 Hahanna which then was replaced permanantly with a 2001 Kilauea.... however, as most of the parts have been on all 3 frames, I see it as one long evolution of the same bike

Thats just me tho.... each to their own as they see fit.. just ride them

G

I agree with this, it works out exactly the same with my trials bikes in that I see the frame as another component. When it gives in I'll replace it but the bike as a whole will still be the same.
The whole topic has been something on my mind in the past few weeks as I'm currently rebuilding a frame from around 1995. I did plan on making it a retro mid 90's build as I had it all those years ago but as I've been buying bits there's some newer stuff slipping through mainly because of the price but also because I'd rather have a bike build I want than a bike build that I can live with as it fits in with the period.