What is a Retro Classic Road Bike ?
- Thread starter madmax
- Start date
Interesting (and good) to see we're having this discussion in the road section. It's something which has cropped up numerous times before in the MTB section of the site.
First up why retrobike for the name of the site? Well (according to wikipedia) the word "retro" derives from the Latin prefix retro, meaning "backwards" or "in past times". As such the usage of the term to denote old bikes is not incorrect in itself although I'm more than aware the normal usage is to denote modern bikes (or whatever) which have the style of an older era. It's a slightly moot point though, my main reasons for choosing the name were a) I thought it quite catchy and b) it seemed to be one of the many terms used to denote retro, vintage, classic bicycles.
What is a retro road bike? It's all quite subjective really and is something we deliberately look not to define (although we were forced to do so in the MTB section). As an interesting aside many will note CR define the end of the classic era as being 1983. From a personal perspective I'd say anything pre 1990 with downtube levers is definitely retro / vintage / classic. For me the end of 'the retro era' vaguely coincides with the end of the use of steel at the highest level, i.e. mid 90s.
First up why retrobike for the name of the site? Well (according to wikipedia) the word "retro" derives from the Latin prefix retro, meaning "backwards" or "in past times". As such the usage of the term to denote old bikes is not incorrect in itself although I'm more than aware the normal usage is to denote modern bikes (or whatever) which have the style of an older era. It's a slightly moot point though, my main reasons for choosing the name were a) I thought it quite catchy and b) it seemed to be one of the many terms used to denote retro, vintage, classic bicycles.
What is a retro road bike? It's all quite subjective really and is something we deliberately look not to define (although we were forced to do so in the MTB section). As an interesting aside many will note CR define the end of the classic era as being 1983. From a personal perspective I'd say anything pre 1990 with downtube levers is definitely retro / vintage / classic. For me the end of 'the retro era' vaguely coincides with the end of the use of steel at the highest level, i.e. mid 90s.
Quite understand the naming of the site as"RetroBike", however my cut off point is 1989.
But this cut off is not as abitrary as it would appear, but my reasons are far too complex for a post on Retrobike.
I would happily write a paper on this; as indeed I did on"The Globalisation of Brands and Professional Cycling".
That's a title by the way.
Retro or not, cycling is a great pastime/hobby/obsession/infatuation.
Roadking.
But this cut off is not as abitrary as it would appear, but my reasons are far too complex for a post on Retrobike.
I would happily write a paper on this; as indeed I did on"The Globalisation of Brands and Professional Cycling".
That's a title by the way.
Retro or not, cycling is a great pastime/hobby/obsession/infatuation.
Roadking.
roadking":2y1dykfb said:
I don't know, why not try us, sure some would be interested as to your reasoning or to read your paper.
roadking":2y1dykfb said:
Agreed
Part of the appeal is of course it can mean many things to many people across all aspects.
Great thread and I'm also interested in the rationale behind the 1989 cutoff as I'm sure that could spark further debate.
For what it's worth, and I suspect not a lot, my interest in road bikes is mainly 1984 to 1992. Why? For me personal resonance is king and there is no family interest in cycling so I can't easily connect to another, earlier era. Therefore I'm sort of stuck, happily, with an age that has meaning in my life. As an aside, this is a splendidly egocentric approach that also applies to music, films and literature - for those I'm 1997 to current day. Anyway, I digress.
Fortunately the 1884-1992 period was a classic era for the Tour de France - we had Miller, Lemond/Hinault, Roche/Delgado, Lemond/Fignon and the emergence of Indurain amongst others. Couple that with some iconic team kits (La Vie Claire, Hitachi, Panasonic, PDM, 7-11) plus the end of Super Record and the birth (and death) of C-Record and it's arguably as good an 8 year stretch as any other (although I'm sure very persuasive case could be made for other eras, and that's at least half the fun).
I'm glad that there is no formal definition as to what constitutes a retro road bike as I think that would be rather limiting and the diversity on here is definitely an attraction - if it was only 84-92 there's no doubt that I could and would learn something but there's far more for me to gain when other eras are included.
Enough of the analysis for now, part of the joy is to respond to a bike on a visceral level without overthinking - do you feel it? If the answer is "yes' then it's all good (although I must acknowledge that the restraint involved in not stating 'vive la difference' was considerable!).
For what it's worth, and I suspect not a lot, my interest in road bikes is mainly 1984 to 1992. Why? For me personal resonance is king and there is no family interest in cycling so I can't easily connect to another, earlier era. Therefore I'm sort of stuck, happily, with an age that has meaning in my life. As an aside, this is a splendidly egocentric approach that also applies to music, films and literature - for those I'm 1997 to current day. Anyway, I digress.
Fortunately the 1884-1992 period was a classic
era for the Tour de France - we had Miller, Lemond/Hinault, Roche/Delgado, Lemond/Fignon and the emergence of Indurain amongst others. Couple that with some iconic team kits (La Vie Claire, Hitachi, Panasonic, PDM, 7-11) plus the end of Super Record and the birth (and death) of C-Record and it's arguably as good an 8 year stretch as any other (although I'm sure very persuasive case could be made for other eras, and that's at least half the fun).I'm glad that there is no formal definition as to what constitutes a retro road bike as I think that would be rather limiting and the diversity on here is definitely an attraction - if it was only 84-92 there's no doubt that I could and would learn something but there's far more for me to gain when other eras are included.
Enough of the analysis for now, part of the joy is to respond to a bike on a visceral level without overthinking - do you feel it? If the answer is "yes' then it's all good (although I must acknowledge that the restraint involved in not stating 'vive la difference' was considerable!).
- Feedback
- View
Even though I'm fairly late to the road bike I think the nail has been hit - "The Globalisation of Brands and Profesional Cycling"
I think that applies to the MTB as we know it too from about 1995 onwards (to be argued on another thread) and, is a good theory on all manner of our hobbies, hifi especially.
I think that applies to the MTB as we know it too from about 1995 onwards (to be argued on another thread) and, is a good theory on all manner of our hobbies, hifi especially.
Citoyen du monde
rBotM Winner
John":3kgwy0n0 said:
I appreciate your thoughts tremendously, plus that fact that you have spent time and energy setting up this whole forum. I believe that when such a forum is set up, it is set up with the goal of bringing like-minded people together. It is however quite clear that over time, we all develop our ideas and interests and sooner or later it is likely that we will no longer be in agreement as to what the forum should be about. I believe this is precisely the reason that you have found a need to define what makes a retro mountain bike, to prevent there being too much of a dispersion of ideas. When you look at the recent entries in the rBotM, you will see that there has been a decided shift to much more current bikes and to those that have been customized as opposed to those that would be expected in a concours setting. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this, in fact I have always preferred to customize my bikes using all the neatest components of the day instead of following the "trends" of the day. So in the 80's this might have meant using OMAS components instead of the more discounted choice of Campagnolo, or perhaps a nice Stronglight 106 or 107 chainset, or some Ofmega Mistral components, or Huret derailleurs... In the classic era, such changes were generally readily possible. Today however, in the non-classic period such combination of parts are simply not possible because most components are designed to work together as a whole set. So if you want to use one brand, you are often obliged to stick to only one brand. Likewise components can rarely be retrofitted without major changes. For example, I would be absolutely delighted if I could change out the original friction derailleurs on my triplet for some modern ergopower shifters. Unfortunately to be able to do so would require me to change handlebars, brake levers, both derailleurs, all three sets of cranks, hubs, spokes and chains. If I did not change all of these components, the derailleurs would not readily work. The interchangeability of components was viable up until the end of 80's approximately so I can well understand your thoughts on the pre-1990's era, but rather than state a specific year I prefer that it be the character of the whole bike be the deciding factor. If the defining elements of a bike are closer to modern day bikes than classics, then it should not be classified as being a retro/vintage/classic bike.
This has been one of the most interesting threads.
Agreement with many of the points raised and of course it's all about the bike - but riding is key!
The paper referred to on globalisation/brands/pro cycling was an assignment written when I was doing my master's in international business - it was published in Marketing Week BITD.
That's the poncy bit, but because I have been a cyclist and cycling enthusiast from an early age, I wanted to do some work on pro cycling - which I have followed since I was at school.
I am fortunate that I have met, and count among my friends, many well known club and pro cyclists, team officials and mechanics.
I'd happily share the paper with anyone who'd like to see it - got to find it first, it was few years ago!
Roadking.
Agreement with many of the points raised and of course it's all about the bike - but riding is key!
The paper referred to on globalisation/brands/pro cycling was an assignment written when I was doing my master's in international business - it was published in Marketing Week BITD.
That's the poncy bit, but because I have been a cyclist and cycling enthusiast from an early age, I wanted to do some work on pro cycling - which I have followed since I was at school.
I am fortunate that I have met, and count among my friends, many well known club and pro cyclists, team officials and mechanics.
I'd happily share the paper with anyone who'd like to see it - got to find it first, it was few years ago!
Roadking.
