Why Catalogue Spec?

[jimo746]

The rest of us just build whatever crap happens to turn up.

This ^^^ is how it should be done.

I find most catalogue spec rebuilds to be a bit boring, I much prefer the variety that comes with aftermarket parts, different makes, colours, designs, it's far more personal.
First thing I did (still do!) when I got a bike was change stuff to what I liked.

 

[cherrybomb]

Re:

I tried to do a catalogue build with my Diamond Back. But just had to tweak it to scratch an itch for Tioga parts.

I guess my current 93 Zaskar LE is the closest to catalogue, but even that sports Suntour XC Pro, just to be a bit different (although this was an option).

It is good fun gathering all the parts together when you have a strict spec to work from, but I do like to be a bit more personal generally.

I tend to buy frames & build them up anyway. My 95 Zaskar was built up from a frame BITD as were my current 'modern' bikes. (Road & Mountain)

I can just never find a factory spec bike that ticks all the boxes. :?

 

[Chdot]

Personal choice.

Some people obsess about weight.

Collecting bikes can be an obsession!

I like something of good quality that works, above 'original spec'.

I've had bikes that left the factory as 18 speeds, which became 21 speed when I got them years later - easier to get quality bits.

Always nice to get a frame in imaculate condition.

Some people are happy with complete restoration. There are a few companies that produce something that may be better than the original - and many decals are available.

One day I might do it.

But then I'd have to think about 'authentic' spec...

 

[Benandemu]

I believe it's because in the time before the Internet a major source of information was through the written word. Anything you could get your hands on regarding our new found sport was either a brochure or a magazine. These publications became a bible for each of us, as we'd revise the specs on everything written in those pages. Through this almost ritualistic nightly revision came comparison, compromise, and choice; what we could afford versus what we really wanted. For most of us we compromised, and settled for something lesser than we desired - fast forward the years, and we're building bikes that realise those dreams.

 

[xxnick1975]

Depends on the bike surely? A top end bike in catalogue spec will be pretty nice, and probably not need too much in terms of upgrades

 

[mattr]

Depends on the bike surely? A top end bike in catalogue spec will be pretty nice, and probably not need too much in terms of upgrades

Nah, i've never had a catalogue spec bike for more than ~24 hours. Even spending near enough 3.5k in the mid 90's had changes to finishing kit, tyres and wheels within a week. Current new bike i'd swapped tyres, pedals, bars, stem and saddle before riding it. And it'll get new brakes within the next couple of weeks (and it's only done ~40k so far)

Pretty much the same story with every bike i've ever owned.

 

[drystonepaul]

Re:

I usually prefer my projects to be at least period correct if not catalogue spec. Having clear parameters helps me define an end point to a build and stops me endlessly procrastinating on what to do next.
I also enjoy the research element of determining the catalogue spec and the challenge of finding the right parts. I have been known to go as far as checking Shimano manufacturing codes to get as close to a date of manufacture as possible.
It's a slow a steady long game approach.

I'm fortunate enough to have plenty of space and plenty of bikes to experiment on.

That's not to say that I exclusively adhere to this approach and every bike I own is by no means period correct. I have a good mixture of completely period correct and catalogue spec bikes, along with many which are constantly evolving. Most of my retro projects however have stagnated due to time constraints over the past couple of years.

Most of my riding is currently on various modern bikes, but I do regularly take out my 1977 Carlton retro mod singlespeed for a ride.

 

[WandsworthRouleur]

I think the attraction of a catalogue spec bike is for that bike you always listed after when you were young, it couldn’t afford.

Seems like everyone else, I never bought a bike without getting the shop to do some form of modification. Don’t think I ever got a bike quite as per the catalogue!

And I don’t think anyone here looks down on non spec bikes. Pretty much everything gs interesting, and catalogue spec is only one of many interesting ways you can go on a build.

 

[shogun]

The catalogue spec is a good starting point for a period correct build. Makes it a bit easier to form an overarching build vision. Frankly if you're not into period correctness, within reason, I don't really see why you'd even bother with old bikes.

I don't really understand some of the 'chip on shoulder' attitudes that get expressed in here. If a hodge podge build doesn't get the same attention as a really era authentic one, well... either you're too concerned with attention or perhaps you've just built an ugly bike.

 

[cherrybomb]

Frankly if you're not into period correctness, within reason, I don't really see why you'd even bother with old bikes.

Really?

I can't see any problem with updating a groupset if it means you can still use a bike reliably without fear of not being able to replace old components when they finally die.

OK, 120mm forks on an '88 frame right not be too great an idea, but even thats not strictly because of 'period correctness.'

Seems a bit short sighted if I'm honest.