To all you running modern set ups on old frames/bikes

[SEANSTEPHENS]

Re: Re:

my 1994 zaskar has a 120mm modern thomson stem and 31.8mm ritchey carbon bars. its a vast improvement on handling and considerably lighter than the 90s combo i had before. also, they suit the bike suprisingly well.... i want to upgrade to a modern sram 9 speed as well, the xt m735 rear derailleur im using at the moment is shit. modern components are undeniably better, so if you can upgrade an older bike to make it ride better then you may as well. although a lot of retro freaks here would disagree

Thats my way of thinking, a few modern bits to get the most out of a bike.
So far I love the "why bother" attitude from a lot of people here. My answer to that is because I can, I have the gear to braze on disc tabs, I have access to a paint shop to refinish the frame, so I dont see a problem.

People here are very keen on keeping their retro bikes retro, even if retro isnt better. if you even mention modern then straight away half the site's members will tell you that your'e a spawn of satan or something
that said, if your going to weld on a disk tab then you may as well sell your older frame and buy a modern one. stick to v brakes or hydraulic rim brakes, if its not designed to run disks then leave it be. if its a decent old frame then you will also devalue it.

sean

 

[chris86]

They aren't really worth much I just like them. The steel tubing is not heat treated so thats not a problem, and the cost of the mod and work to do it is far less than the cost of buying a modern frame I like.

 

[mattr]

"Problem" I have is all the retro and semi retro stuff I have was all brand new when I bought it (or at least un used) and has then been in almost continuous use since.
Piecemeal upgrades and replacement over the years means that my original retro Raleigh road bike has been campag 8, shimano 9, 10 and now 11. It's had three forks and two paint jobs. My MTB and CX are the same.
There's never been a "modernisation" as such, just an ongoing process of replacing last year's knackered kit with this year's new kit. So where does that leave me?

(Not actually worried about it, all the bikes have a history tome, and are worthless in terms of selling on, what would I get towards an equivalent replacement if I sold a 17 or 18 year old steel framed road bike........ Not much!)

 

[Titiritero]

Re:

My only change has been to swap the stem for something a bit higher and a bit shorter (comfort wins over looks).

Other than that, I don't do "upgrades" on my bikes. If it works, it means it's good enough for the rider. Only when something breaks I will look for something nicer, mostly what has already been mentioned here, in my case mostly to increase usability rather than "performance" (wider tires, 34T middle ring instead of 36T, 13-30 cassette instead of 12-28, etc.).

It would be nice to swap to v-brakes, but as long as the DX cantilevers don't break (and I doubt they'll ever will)....

 

[legrandefromage]

Re: Re:

my 1994 zaskar has a 120mm modern thomson stem and 31.8mm ritchey carbon bars. its a vast improvement on handling and considerably lighter than the 90s combo i had before. also, they suit the bike suprisingly well.... i want to upgrade to a modern sram 9 speed as well, the xt m735 rear derailleur im using at the moment is shit. modern components are undeniably better, so if you can upgrade an older bike to make it ride better then you may as well. although a lot of retro freaks here would disagree

sean

Your frame has suspension corrected geometry btw. Many a booboo has been made by using the wrong rigid fork and screwing up the handling in the same way a too long suspension fork will want to try and rip the head tube off.

Are they replacement jockey wheels in your rear mech? If so, that will be the reason why 'its shit' - you've lost the 0.2mm float in the top jockey wheel. A mistake a lot of people make.

As for modern components being 'undeniably better' - No. They are the same if not a little worse. Many are not as serviceable as they used to be and anecdotal evidence of mechs snapping more easily. That M732 rear mech will do 9spd quite happily but it wont do anything nicely with the wrong jockey wheels. Sram has a lot of plastic parts and are not as user rebuildable

And you have to remember that 10/11 spds sit on the same spacing as 8spd. The cogs being closer together mean shorter shifting and because of the distances involved it will feel faster than anything previous - but, its just as susceptible to dragging cables causing miss-shifts just like anything from the last 25 years.

Then theres anecdotal evidence of external BB's not lasting as long for some as other BB methods.

As for the 'retro freaks' comment - why? Its a site dedicated to all sorts but why label its users like that? You seem to have overlooked the vast experience of a lot of the sites users. They dont recommend something just because a magazine said so, they are more likely to have been there and done that many times over. This culminates int a huge knowledge base - something you seem to like sneering at - Theres plenty of other sites if you dont like it here.

 

[legrandefromage]

What do you find are the most beneficial modern parts/upgrades to an old bike. eg wide bars and shorter stems, longer forks etc.
I have a couple frames from 92-94 that I really like, they stand me very little but Id like them to ride a lot better. I will be going with a 1x9 setup and rigid forks but I was curious how other people got round this.
Thanks

The most beneficial modern parts to make an old bike work better are cables, cassette and chain. Does wonders.

Then theres BBs which are the next most worn out bit.

Fitness does more miracles than anything else too.

But, as above, be wary of buggering up geometries by too long/ short forks. New stems and bars are great but beware of fakes! Something we never had to worry about not that long ago. I never seem to be able to find a decent sweep these days so I'm still using older stuff.

 

[StealthDJ]

To my mind, there's three things to consider - weight, reliability and cost. Previously, you could choose one of those, two on a good day. Now you get two and very occasionally, three.

Modern drivetrains, rubber and brakes can be as reliable as you like, but significantly lighter than than old kit. Lighweight alloy and even titanium bits can be had for (relatively) less than previously, so you can keep the old frame that you love, but shave a pound off the weight without spending a fortune.

Oh and another vote for lock on grips. And there's a lot to be said for a braking system (v-brakes) that's a doddle to setup compared to cantis and doesn't have a failure mode that's likely to drop a brake cable into your front tyre and pitch you over the handlebars...

Obviously it's all subjective though - for everyone who loves the advances that have happened since the early 90s, there's someone running a 1989 groupset that's still going strong and doesn't see why anyone would want anything different.

 

[legrandefromage]

Modern tyres are fantastic!

 

[sheard]

Re: Re:

As for modern components being 'undeniably better' - No. They are the same if not a little worse. Many are not as serviceable as they used to be and anecdotal evidence of mechs snapping more easily. That M732 rear mech will do 9spd quite happily but it wont do anything nicely with the wrong jockey wheels. Sram has a lot of plastic parts and are not as user rebuildable

My dad rides a 2012 diamondback with Sram X5 components. Recently the rear mech snapped and after closer inspection it was almost entirely plastic; it was definetley not rebuildable. Then there's my 93' Stumpjumper that has had nothing break.

Then theres anecdotal evidence of external BB's not lasting as long for some as other BB methods.

The bottom bracket on my Klein is just as nice as new bottom brackets, while being way, way simpler.

As for the 'retro freaks' comment - why? Its a site dedicated to all sorts but why label its users like that? You seem to have overlooked the vast experience of a lot of the sites users. They dont recommend something just because a magazine said so, they are more likely to have been there and done that many times over. This culminates int a huge knowledge base - something you seem to like sneering at - Theres plenty of other sites if you dont like it here.

That's what MTBR is for.

 

[SEANSTEPHENS]

Re: Re:

my 1994 zaskar has a 120mm modern thomson stem and 31.8mm ritchey carbon bars. its a vast improvement on handling and considerably lighter than the 90s combo i had before. also, they suit the bike suprisingly well.... i want to upgrade to a modern sram 9 speed as well, the xt m735 rear derailleur im using at the moment is shit. modern components are undeniably better, so if you can upgrade an older bike to make it ride better then you may as well. although a lot of retro freaks here would disagree

sean

Your frame has suspension corrected geometry btw. Many a booboo has been made by using the wrong rigid fork and screwing up the handling in the same way a too long suspension fork will want to try and rip the head tube off.

Are they replacement jockey wheels in your rear mech? If so, that will be the reason why 'its shit' - you've lost the 0.2mm float in the top jockey wheel. A mistake a lot of people make.

As for modern components being 'undeniably better' - No. They are the same if not a little worse. Many are not as serviceable as they used to be and anecdotal evidence of mechs snapping more easily. That M732 rear mech will do 9spd quite happily but it wont do anything nicely with the wrong jockey wheels. Sram has a lot of plastic parts and are not as user rebuildable

And you have to remember that 10/11 spds sit on the same spacing as 8spd. The cogs being closer together mean shorter shifting and because of the distances involved it will feel faster than anything previous - but, its just as susceptible to dragging cables causing miss-shifts just like anything from the last 25 years.

Then theres anecdotal evidence of external BB's not lasting as long for some as other BB methods.

As for the 'retro freaks' comment - why? Its a site dedicated to all sorts but why label its users like that? You seem to have overlooked the vast experience of a lot of the sites users. They dont recommend something just because a magazine said so, they are more likely to have been there and done that many times over. This culminates int a huge knowledge base - something you seem to like sneering at - Theres plenty of other sites if you dont like it here.

this is why you cant say anything controversial on this site because someone will jump down your throat for expressing and opinion which doesnt agree with theirs. dont be so sensitive, it was a light hearted comment for gawd sake and lets not get into that old vs new debate, they are new jockeys but its a problem thats recently developed because the pivots are worn and have play. This is because the mech is old and Old parts fail. Using components quarter a centry old is not a good idea even though this whole site is based around that idea. Some parts from 20 years ago are still usable today so fair enough there but parts such as the drivetrain components which are most subjectable to wear and have seen a lot of use in that time should of been retired a long time ago. Somebody who goes out of his way to find bikes in bins should know that