Ugly modern bikes

[gradeAfailure]

I cannot believe someone who owns a Raleigh RSP 300 can criticise the looks of a Cotic Rocket

Search>RSP 300

<sees pictures>

Pass the eye bleach please..

 

[elPedro666]

I cannot believe someone who owns a Raleigh RSP 300 can criticise the looks of a Cotic Rocket

Search>RSP 300

<sees pictures>

Pass the eye bleach please..

Despite this quite clear warning I did, of course, just do exactly the same :facepalm:

Not the prettiest, but I've seen much worse, including that Cotic, not a looker in my book, sorry.

Trouble with those Raleighs is they attract plastic mudguards, massive saddle covers and goodness knows what else like flies to a rotting donkey :x

 

[elPedro666]

As an aside, this may be an internet first; page four of an interesting, friendly discussion and it's still an interesting, friendly discussion - not a single accusation of anybody being a child-molesting nazi yet, pats on the back all round fellas!

Mind you, not much been said about carbon yet...

:twisted:

 

[ibbz]

I cannot believe someone who owns a Raleigh RSP 300 can criticise the looks of a Cotic Rocket

How dare you! How diddly dare you criticise my beautiful yellow bike, don't you know that I LOVE IT?? Oh my Gosh! waahh!! sob sob! You B*stard! :cry:


(wipes away tears) It's no Helen of troy, but it has a certain charm. besides, I bought it for sentimental reasons, historical reasons, and because of the 853 hand built nature rather than looks.
It's one of those bikes where it all depends upon the secondary components - the RSP 500 and the RSP freeride are essentially the same frames, and I've seen some very attractive examples of these... (apart from Bikemeister2000's prototype - that's a bit too loud and mag-wheeled crazy for my liking)


Whereas the MT4 now, that's a gorgeous bike!

And did someone mention Carbon???

 

[Russell]

Mind you, not much been said about carbon yet..

Yeah... those ugly modern carbuncles.

 

[elPedro666]

Modern, custom carbon frames; no doubt that's the future for me ... ignoring cost of course!

Had such a lust for that Kestral (it is a Kestral I think?) around the hay-day of the Malvern Classic, so futuristic!

 

[Woz]

Sure you might be able to traverse a glacier in some of em or rode backwards through the sahara but that doesn't detract from the fact they look like sh1t

Totally agree.

Don't agree. Modern bikes are probably not capable in the Sahara or going over a glacier - not straight out of the shop anyhow. By the looks how some are put together they probably don't go 2 yards down the street.

And yes, modern bikes generally are an aesthetic eye sore. One reason I'm here is because of exactly the same experience you had!

Horrific sights - MTB gone OTT with MX influences and road bikes become a bloody advertising circus and employing (older) MTB technology. Too much molded plastic too. My modern from this year is a steel retro re-birth MASI CX with cantilevers, square taper, five arm crank, and no integrated what nots - don't care if it's not this so called "high performance" nonsense but I know it will last and I can wrench on it as I like

 

[ibbz]

Sure you might be able to traverse a glacier in some of em or rode backwards through the sahara but that doesn't detract from the fact they look like sh1t

Totally agree.

Don't agree. Modern bikes are probably not capable in the Sahara or going over a glacier - not straight out of the shop anyhow. By the looks how some are put together they probably don't go 2 yards down the street.

And yes, modern bikes generally are an aesthetic eye sore. One reason I'm here is because of exactly the same experience you had!

Horrific sights - MTB gone OTT with MX influences and road bikes become a bloody advertising circus and employing (older) MTB technology. Too much molded plastic too. My modern from this year is a steel retro re-birth MASI CX with cantilevers, square taper, five arm crank, and no integrated what nots - don't care if it's not this so called "high performance" nonsense but I know it will last and I can wrench on it as I like

woz, mate, I could never have worded my own thoughts as well as you did here!

About traversing glaciers and the Sahara - not literally of course, perhaps a downhill section in Epping Forest without jarring their arses perhaps.

 

[markwashington]

The reason I'm always on this website and lusting after the other bikes is because I love retro bikes. I do have a modern full suss and yes it does a decent job, 120mm travel is enough for me but it's an ugly bike. I think what this thread is saying is that modern bikes are ugly, not whether they perform better that retro bikes or not.

I liken it to the cars I've owned. I currently drive a classic mini, it's awful on motorways (read trail center), It's continually breaking down (read cantis), and it's awful over any sort of bump (read rigid). however whenever I look at it, I'm in love. I think that's the case with retro bikes, they might not "perform" as well as a modern bike, but they put a grin on our faces and whenever we open the shed to get them out, they look like we want bikes to look.

For me modern bikes are like an ugly woman who's amazing at sex (or specific sex acts depending on what floats your boat) whereas Retrobikes (not all) are like a Jessica Alba or a Kate Bekinsale, I could sit and stare at them all day.

 

[JamesM]

Hydroforming aside, it's simply a geometry thing for me. 100 -140 mm forks are the norm now as are riser bars, making the front end very high. I just prefer the old skool look of near horizontal top tube, short (ish) fork and a good saddle to bar drop.