Rose tinted...?

[jax13]

The amount of perfectly usable cars wasted during the scrappage scheme was criminal - they cost more to dispose of than to make useful again.

whats even more criminal are the numbers of old series II landrovers, classic MG's of varying age and style, old triumphs etc that some folk traded in for an easy £2k.

these cars can now no longer be driven on the road and most were probably melted down to be turned into nissan micra bootlids.



heritage only exists if there are people willing to defend it. some may call bikes, cars etc. vintage others may call them retro and some will call them old, knackered outdated crap but there is always going to be a minority that cherish and enjoy them for what they are. this isn't because of the rose tinted glasses, this is because they can appreciate what is in front of them for what it is and for the period in which it was derived.

put the same unbiased rider on a course with a mid-range spesh / trek and a retro equivalent and see what times they post on each bike and it will tell you more about progress than any rep will ever manage. ask them how they felt about each one before, during and after riding it and it may tell a completely different story.

 

[Rumble]

I like bikes, riding bikes and building bikes. I think old bikes probably have more character, maybe the build quality is better too. So more interesting yes, but to compare a retro to it's modern equivalent, to be honest the new bike is likely to be 'better' in most cases.

Still like building and riding retro though, it's fun and a bit different. And it's a much better bang for your buck.

Oh, and I drive a 19 year old mitsubishi - no way is it better than the new model but it's still great fun!

 

[longun]

over took 3 pros on the downhill section at mayhem on my last lap.........................................




so what you may think...........................






i was riding a 1993 trek 9000 with disc wheel, was absolutely buggered oh,and was dressed as a bear.




its all about the rider,old bikes can be just as good as new,if not better at times,mark.........rant away,most agree with ya pal

 

[bm0p700f]

I ride a retro kona of some description and outpaced folks on thier new fangled mtb's at the weekend showing it is the rider not the bike. I really like riding that bike.

As for cars my only car is an 80's BMW 5 series 527i (I know they built one but that does not stop me) which handles and goes as quickly or quicker as many modern cars. Old does not mean bad, that BMW has covered 198,000 miles 77,000 in my ownership of 3.5 years and is as reliable or more so than a new cars. It even manages over 30 mpg when driven with pace although that not that brillant. Oh it sounds fantastic too.

 

[petitpal]

The thing that gets me - I was doing some research in to upgrading recently having dug my dear old Zaskar out of the garage (forgotton how much I've missed that bike) and ever sodding forum you read it's something akin to, "well, if you want to buy x make sure its pre y because they stopped making them in z then and now they're crap" (where x = component, y = year, z = country (e.g. x=marzochi, y=2007, z=italy). Now for me - my 1996 Zaskar was hand made in California and works bloody well. No, I can't chuck myself off eight foot high rocks... but that's because they're eight foot high and there's normally a slight saner route round them that's a lot more fun... half of 90's mountain biking was about tea and cake and enjoying it. Seems like to enjoy mainstream MTB these days you have to have a specialist XC machine, a DH bike, a trail centre bike a dirt bike and one to pop to the shops on...

Edit: sorry, trying to keep myself off the soap box here... But I can remember back in the day (mid 90's) sitting behind all kinds of weird and wonderful kit (proflex's, etc) at race meetings and whacking past them it in to the first corner. As others have said, it ain't what you ride its the way that you ride it.

And to visit your car analogy: I owned a '66 Beetle for a long while and no, it wasn't quite a fancy as the new stuff but I could fix anything I wanted on it (strip down the engine in a weekend) without having to restort to £400 serivce fees to change the sodding spark plugs.

New isn't necessarily better (although it might be, sometimes... )

 

[petitpal]

And, btw, I very nearly fell into the marketing hype crap too... dug the old bike out the garage and though: "oh no! I need disk brakes, I need new forks, I need rear suspension". Then I looked through the old photos and remembered that I didn't. I rode it hell for leather then and the hills haven't changed that much in the last decade, so no reason I need 4" of travel everywhere now.

 

[hamster]

I forgot to say that the MBR (I think) in its buyers guide I bought recently said that hardtails were only suitable for towpaths and towing child trailers down to the shops.
Apparently what I needed was a 4", 6" and 8" full susser, otherwise it (whatever it was) would be unrideable.

Well, that's us told then. :roll:

 

[JohnH]

over took 3 pros on the downhill section at mayhem on my last lap.........................................

i was riding a 1993 trek 9000 with disc wheel, was absolutely buggered oh,and was dressed as a bear.

Okay, that did make me laugh out loud....

 

[petitpal]

Goes to show how sodding clueless a lot of these people are. Very similar, though, to when you hear people flogging PCs these days, "Oh no madam, if your don't have this Cray Super computer you'll bearly be able to browse the Internet"

 

[Russell]

over took 3 pros on the downhill section at mayhem on my last lap.

Who?