doctor-bond
Feature Bike
The Ken":1175m11y said:My bike was cutting edge when I bought it, it's only retro because I'm old now
That's not far off. I got into mountainbikes as soon as I knew they existed, which happened to be shortly after they were readily available in the uk. So I bought one.
When it got v. tatty I did it up, and a top chap caller bikeshopowner pointed out that a bunch of other people also liked bikes that weren't new, and that many of them could be found being wonderfully geeky here.
I now own a number of bikes that were built over a 40year period, and I continue to get a kick out of riding and tinkering them.
Yet I don't think that the appeal of vintage/retro/classicness is defined by a rolling retrospective window: i.e. it's not about bikes that were built x number of years ago. If in 2061 people are arguing over whether retro began at 2045 or 2046 then I'll tap on the jar in which they keep my suspended head, and frown sternly.
It's more about beginnings and endings. Triangular bike frames made of brazed steel of one sort or another were cutting edge for the best part of a century. The fact that the beginnings of mountainbiking coincided with the end of steel's monopoly as a top bike frame material is what gives flavour to the retroness I understand. I love the lugged creations that were the last of the many, the first of a few.
Turning the timeline on its head, when dinosaurs were roaming the earth no one would have paid any attention to a few scratty mammals sucking teats in their burrows, but in hindsight those early ancestors are way cool: and the first examples of bikes of a defining nature are always going to gain a retro following: aluminium, suspension, carbon, brakes that work, hover cycles, telebikes......
Retroness is interesting because it is inextricably linked to novelty (hence the carbon seatpost )