What is a Retro Classic Road Bike ?

madmax

Dirt Disciple
What is a Retro Classic Road Bike ?

I know this question has been asked before, but I couldn't find a suitable or definitive answer in this forum. Perhaps there isn't one.

For me, as general rule, a classic retro road bike has to have down-tube or bar-end shifters, or older styles. And I like the bike to pre-date 1990, which caters for fixed wheel bikes, but as the years pass this rule may change for me. I also like to see lugs but there are of course some exceptions like early titanium frames.

When voting in the RBOTM I tend to disregard anything not fitting into my own definition, no matter how impressive.

I'm not against people entering their post 1990 bikes in the RBOTM competition, as there doesn't seem to be any rules precluding them. I would like to hear from other members on this topic, and perhaps come to a general consensus.
 
madmax":55u7a5hy said:
What is a Retro Classic Road Bike ?

I know this question has been asked before, but I couldn't find a suitable or definitive answer in this forum. Perhaps there isn't one.

My opinion but I think there needs to be a definitive answer, and it may very well be one that currently exists.

However, I do not favour the term"Retro", it is too much of catch-all for what I am suggesting - Retro to my mind are bicycles that seek to copy those of the classic period: therefore they are not"originals".

The BMW Mini is retro, the Issigonis Mini is the classic. A copy is always retro: nothing wrong with retro, so I'm not misunderstood.

A classic road bike is one built during the"classic era"usually agreed as being before and including 1983 (the year Tullio Campagnolo died). However, I personally would stretch this to perhaps the end of the 1980s.

My view is that the"classic"era (or"classic era"), in both bicycles and professional racing ended in 1989*. I'll not seek to explain why I take this view as it would take a few pages as there are many reasons-not all obvious.

*one part of the reason: in the UK, Raleigh's SBDU at Ilkeston closed in 1990.

A classic bike is one built from steel(usually), has downtube shifters and pedals with toeclips and straps, early clipless pedals are acceptable such as original Looks (PP45/46), or the very rare Cinelli clipless pedal which was not a commercial success.

Roadking.
 
My Panasonic PR-6000 has dual pivots and STI - both new back than. Would I consider it classic? I think so.

It not easy to draw a line based on some simple rules. I think what for me is an important difference between old era and new era is that old era was more traditional and new era is much more based on innovation. Roughly the transition period got shape with DA7400 in 1984. The emerging of the mountainbike, its industry and their business model did a lot as well.

About a decade long we still saw classic classics and interesting hybrids. By about 1995 steel definately went out fashion as material to build frames of, production went elsewhere, the roadmarket had started to look a lot like the ATB market: less traditional, more innovation, shorter cycli and so on.
 
Elev12k said:
My Panasonic PR-6000 has dual pivots and STI...I think what for me is an important difference between old era and new era is that old era was more traditional and new era is much more based on innovation. quote]

Elev12k.

Interesting...innovation is not a new thing, the quick release, the parallelogram derailleur, Reynolds Speedstream tubeset, carbon fibre frames, various other alloys, even the Sturmey Archer hub gear: only a few innovations from the"old...traditional...era".

Without the old era there would be no new era (following your argument). So-called innovations are merely developments of real innovation. It is simple to develop an idea, very difficult to be a true innovator and work off a blank sheet of paper.

Carbon fibre frames for example aren't the innovation, carbon fibre is the innovation, anyway Gerald O'Donovan built the first way back.

Roots.

Early mountainbikes were simple modifications of beach cruisers...they developed from there - all part of the same"tree".

Amongst my school friends in the 1970s (I'm of a certain age), there was an off road development...we modified old roadsters or grey porridge racers and converted them into what we called"track bikes", with cross tyres, no mudguards and cowhorn bars, often converted to single speed (not fixed) or retaining a hub gear.

We were there off-roading before the Americans.

Roadking.
 
Criteria like the death of a frame builder are far too subjective; basing it on component technolgy doesn't really work either - constant innovation makes that too fluid.

I've got a simple rule of thumb: lugs. And that draws the line pretty neatly around 1990, although lugged bikes after 1990 are in too.

Exceptions? For Ti it doesn't really matter - apart from a couple of Speedwells, all Ti is modern era so let's say 1990 again. For Fillet brazed - any date is ok: FB is naturally retro.

What about Aluminium? Like Ti: Pre 90.
 
doctor-bond":1s49fvmh said:
Criteria like the death of a frame builder are far too subjective. I've got a simple rule of thumb: lugs. And that draws the line pretty neatly around 1990, although lugged bikes after 1990 are in too.
Exceptions? For Ti it doesn't really matter - apart from a couple of Speedwells, all Ti is modern era so let's say 1990 again. For Fillet brazed -any date is ok: FB is naturally retro.
What about Aluminium? Like Ti: Pre 90.

Doctor-bond.
Interesting-especially over a few beers...but;
the closure of the SBDU as stated is one of many events I would cite within my"thesis", and classic era would have a different thesis to classic bike.
Building a fillet brazed steel frame today, to my mind would be retro not classic (how many are FB'd or are they TIG'd?).
Building something that looks backward to a previous era is clearly retro; it is copying.
And the current craze is sales and marketing led.
Calling a Robin Day chair retro is wrong, it is a classic, innovative design.
At least we agree on dates - the end of the 1980s: as the end of the classic era.
At least one thing is for sure; all my bikes are classics.
Rk.
 
roadking":2mifzey7 said:
Elev12k":2mifzey7 said:
My Panasonic PR-6000 has dual pivots and STI...I think what for me is an important difference between old era and new era is that old era was more traditional and new era is much more based on innovation. quote]

Elev12k.

Interesting...innovation is not a new thing, the quick release, the parallelogram derailleur, Reynolds Speedstream tubeset, carbon fibre frames, various other alloys, even the Sturmey Archer hub gear: only a few innovations from the"old...traditional...era".

Without the old era there would be no new era (following your argument). So-called innovations are merely developments of real innovation. It is simple to develop an idea, very difficult to be a true innovator and work off a blank sheet of paper.

Carbon fibre frames for example aren't the innovation, carbon fibre is the innovation, anyway Gerald O'Donovan built the first way back.

Roots.

Early mountainbikes were simple modifications of beach cruisers...they developed from there - all part of the same"tree".

Amongst my school friends in the 1970s (I'm of a certain age), there was an off road development...we modified old roadsters or grey porridge racers and converted them into what we called"track bikes", with cross tyres, no mudguards and cowhorn bars, often converted to single speed (not fixed) or retaining a hub gear.

We were there off-roading before the Americans.

Roadking.

Yes, of course there has been innovation, but for example Nuovo Record lasted from late 60s to mid 80s without meaningfull modifications. Such wouldn't be possible anymore. The customer would laugh you in the face.

Probably you were earlier with off roading than the Americans and possibly there are more who can claim that, but the consensus is that the MTB as we know it today originates from California. They generated the momentum. The MTB market was much easier with accepting innovation and gradually the business model were adapted to the roadscene. Without Shimano and the people from America we would probably be still riding Nuovo Record and be happy with it.
 
Agreed retro is modern looking old.
Classic would to me end when STI/Ergos appeared at the very latest. Actually I think that a much better cut off would be when brake cables went under the tape and/or when toe clips went. 25 years old is not really classic by any stretch of the imagination so maybe again, my criteria is to new.
It would mean only steel with the exception of the inovators eg Alan and Vitus etc. An alloy Specialized, for example, can't be classic.
Classic surely must also mean something with an appeal of quality not gas pipe junk.
90's bike are not classic by any stretch of the imagination.
 
Back
Top