Classic & Vintage - "classic" vs. new bike performance

Let me preface this by saying I haven’t seriously ridden a bike in about 17 years! That said, I live on an excellent road for riding (Grizzly Peak in Berkeley) and seeing all the cyclists ride by has given me the itch to ride again. For reference on level, I used to be a Nike sponsored triathlete, raced Cat2’s and at 46 I am still pretty (very) fit from yoga, rock climbing and rowing. So even though I haven’t ridden, performance counts. A lot.

In my basement I have a 1985 custom SLX frame by Rob Roberson, with a Joe bell paint job and Campy c-record components. It needs a repaint, and general rebuild, but I love the idea of riding a “classic”. Assuming I upgrade wheels to pretty much state of the art, how much performance am I giving up compared to new frames/components?

I know comparing my modern Ducati superbike to the 1985 version is a world of difference. I just have no feel for how much has changed in the bike world (aside from other materials) and really appreciate any feedback.

My .02, as another fit guy in his late 40's:

Riding a modern bike gives me the sense that I'm harnessing the power of technology. Riding a vintage bike gives me the sense that I'm riding a responsive animal. I'm a boat guy as my other hobby, and while fiberglass and carbon fiber can get you through the water pretty fast and pretty reliably, clear cedar planking over oak frames make you feel like you're part of the ocean. Example: if you're a rower I'm sure that a new honeycomb Vespoli will be faster than a cedar and spruce vintage Pocock ... but the Pocock will make you grin every now and then without knowing why, and a whole lot more people will want to talk to you about your boat ...

The biggest difference in performance comes from the user. So... Clean it, lube it, ride it and see how you feel with it. (But I'd get a new saddle, real advances have been made there)

In my basement I have a 1985 custom SLX frame by Rob Roberson, with a Joe bell paint job and Campy c-record components. It needs a repaint, and general rebuild, but I love the idea of riding a “classic”. Assuming I upgrade wheels to pretty much state of the art, how much performance am I giving up compared to new frames/components?


I'd think it depends on how you feel about downtube shifters v. ergolevers.

Let me preface this by saying I haven’t seriously ridden a bike in about 17 years! That said, I live on an excellent road for riding (Grizzly Peak in Berkeley) and seeing all the cyclists ride by has given me the itch to ride again. For reference on level, I used to be a Nike sponsored triathlete, raced Cat2’s and at 46 I am still pretty (very) fit from yoga, rock climbing and rowing. So even though I haven’t ridden, performance counts. A lot.

In my basement I have a 1985 custom SLX frame by Rob Roberson, with a Joe bell paint job and Campy c-record components. It needs a repaint, and general rebuild, but I love the idea of riding a “classic”. Assuming I upgrade wheels to pretty much state of the art, how much performance am I giving up compared to new frames/components?

I know comparing my modern Ducati superbike to the 1985 version is a world of difference. I just have no feel for how much has changed in the bike world (aside from other materials) and really appreciate any feedback.
New paintjob already?
I say clean it up first and see how it is.


I'd think it depends on how you feel about downtube shifters v. ergolevers.
But older bikes can be updated, I would keep the downtube shifters but it's an option.

WOw, that is quite a bike you have and I am sure it is worth more than you paid parted out. You should ride it and see what you think, you road it before so I am sure you will find to perform quite well. the only difference in a newer bike will be your gearing options, you can also hot rod your bike with newer shifters and derailleurs, but save the C-record parts!!!

I would rather ride a high-quality classic than a mediocre modern bike any time.

As for performance, the single most important component has always been the man or woman in the saddle.

Great feedback and thanks so much to everyone that took the time to reply. Decision made, and I'll take it down to Robinson Wheel works the weekend...

Regarding the above, while I know the person in the saddle is the most important element - my question was, given the same person what is the performance difference? And it would be between my classic and say a Trek Madone 6.9....

I would rather ride a high-quality classic than a mediocre modern bike any time.

As for performance, the single most important component has always been the man or woman in the saddle.
Brothers and sisters, lets have an Amen!
Check it out, do whatever PM is required, get on it, and ride!
PastorBob, the sermon is yours.
Top
(Who shoots better with a NM M1 than he ever did with the issued AMU M14)

Its like comapring anything from two different periods. If you hop in a new Corvette and drive it for awhile then hop in old '72 your going to have 2 different experiences. A new 'vette will never give you that raw muscle car feel. An old vette will never give you that refined feel.

Every aspect of a bike has changed since 1985. If you prefer the 'feel' of old steel keep your bike and enjoy. I'd recommend changing to a modern tire and doing a drivetrain upgrade.

Every aspect of a bike has changed since 1985. If you prefer the 'feel' of old steel keep your bike and enjoy. I'd recommend changing to a modern tire and doing a drivetrain upgrade.
So that's when you must ask yourself the question, why are you riding?
If it's for leisure, go classic.

Every aspect of a bike has changed since 1985. If you prefer the 'feel' of old steel keep your bike and enjoy. I'd recommend changing to a modern tire and doing a drivetrain upgrade.
Every aspect of computers has changed since 1985 -- they are thousands of times faster -- but bikes have just been tweaked around the edges. Bikes are indeed like computers and vettes -- it's the motor that really matters.

Modern:

Posh braking and geartrain systems. Compact frame sizing (top tube length comes to mind) with agressive riding positioning. Twitchy handling. Noisy, plastic-ish ride qualities.

Vintage:

No-nonsense, function-and-simplicity-are-key drivetrains; brakesets require a tad more effort in some cases. Very comfortable rider positioning, even on many machines made for criterium racing. Handling can be anywhere from downright leisurely to responsive/twitchy, depending on the machine you get. Reassuring, strong feel when riding - feels like riding a good piece of quality machinery, not a snap-fit plastic model car kit.

miamijim puts it very well in the comparison between Vettes of different eras. Goes for any current automobile VS. its pre '80s counterpart.

-Kurt

Ask your LBS to let you take one of their new bikes for a test ride. See if you can't get one that's in the price range you'd be thinking of spending if you were to get a new bike. Then take your old bike (after tuning it up) for a ride. I think you'll find that the newer bicycle will be 2-3 pounds lighter, that you'll have more gearing choices, and that you'll like the braking and shifting better on the new one as well.

If you are thinking of competitive riding, you would be putting yourself at a bit of a disadvantage by using your older bike. If you are not looking to ride competitively, I think you'll find your vintage bike to be a more comfortable ride, and a lot more attractive. It really will come down to what you value in a bicycle.

I have the same problem with my Gios circa 1982 or so. I live in Socal so we have lots of hills. My Gios is a 5 speed spacing and i can pull it to 6 if I have too. You probably are still strong but if the riding you'll be doing is with a lot of guys doing hills, you may have a hard time getting the right ratio with campy rings. Unless you can get a rear hub with a couple of spacers taken out, you'll have to stretch the rear dropout to accomadate. Good luck with yours! One of these days, I'll get my Gios to Joe Bell.

If you're used to the old, then stick with it. After all, what you haven't tried, you won't miss, and, unless you're racing, why do you need it?

The big thing that's advanced for me, however, is the brakes. I love aero levers, and double pivot sidepulls are a big improvement. I rode a 9 speed across London, and just found it confusing, with no real advantage. I haven't tried brifters, but I'm quite happy reaching down to shift, and I like things that are easy to shift, and, with my lightest bike already 19lb, I don't really feel the need for a lighter one. Plus, we're the coolest guys on the whole forum, you want to hang with us, trust me.

Brothers and sisters, lets have an Amen!
Check it out, do whatever PM is required, get on it, and ride!
PastorBob, the sermon is yours.
Top
(Who shoots better with a NM M1 than he ever did with the issued AMU M14)
Thank you Top for inviting me to the pulpit this morning. Welcome along 8Lives. Bless you for returning to cycling! We C&V faithful wish you all the best in your quest to respin the cranks. While we are humbled and honored that you have come to us for the guidance and wisdom you seek, we are probably not, my son, the best source for the advice you seek. You see, we are very prejudice towards road bikes, built from steel, any kind of steel, heavy, light, and in between. We don't mind that our bikes weigh in the upper 20s, in fact even the 30 lb. range is acceptable to some. And while vintage road bikes equiped with Brooks, Campy, Cinelli, and built with 531, most certainly makes our hearts skip beats, many of us consider rides such as this one, to be just as sweet!
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p71/pastorbobnlnh/66CollegiateHR3.jpg
Now don't laugh, 8Lives, many of us do go out and ride Electro Forge Schwinns and old Ralieghs, etc., which nearly nudge the scales to 40 lbs. And we enjoy those rides and the funny and indignant looks we receive from our fellow cyclists riding along on their unobtainium, TI, CF, alloy, modern and up to date component beauties of CAD marvels of the latest technology. We also sometimes drop such riders, and we have a good natured chuckle to ourselves as we do so.

Another aspect of our passion is that we tend to spend more time around thrift stores, the Salvation Army, dumpsters, dumps, with our eyes curbside, then we ever do at the LBS. Many of us share this addiction. Our spouses would say it is an affliction, but many are kind and understanding because time spent dumpster diving, keeps us away from bars and other questionable places. Often times when we come across a bike like the one in the next illustration, we become even more excited:
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p71/pastorbobnlnh/Hercules/DeadHeap.jpg
Now with all that said, and how to the congregation of the C&V faithful, any vintage steel has value and worth, and can be an object of both beauty and wonderful transportation, we must confess, that we each have a "Holy Grail," a bike that we long for, that pulls at our heart strings, that calls to us in our dreams. Such obsession can be illustrated by the next picture:
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p71/pastorbobnlnh/66ParamountOct242006.jpg
Yet my heart remains troubled by your OP and by your response, Brother 8Lives. I hear in your words a longing to return to competition, and to do so in way that younger triathletes, cyclists, etc., stand up and take notice. This is a worthy calling, and I'm certain you will continue to be a wonderful example and leader to those who participate in such endeavors. I wonder, based on the questions you ask, will you be satisfied with a bicycle, that while it was top notch in its day, still is equiped with 20+ year old dated components? Will you, ponder that there is an edge, an advantage, to be gained by riding a bike that weighs in the mid teens? That is equiped with the newest and most amazing latest technology? If this is your obsession, then still your troubled soul, get yourself down to the LBS, and start test riding the best CF they can put under your well toned and disciplined rump. In the end, I believe you will be more happy than in restoring your old steed.

Bless you my son.

Can I get a loud AMEN! from the C&V faithful in the congregation?

Amen, Pastor!

Well said. Amen.

Aaaaaaaaammmmmmmeeeeeeennnnnnn! :beer:

Amen!

And if you don't want that bike, let us here know first!

(and you all know I'm not seeking it for myself...just looking out for us here, that's all)

East Hill

Amen!

And pity on the sinners who ride modern machines... :p

-Kurt

Pastor,

Thank you for the eloquent and helpful reply. I have no intention on returning to competition. What I was trying to gauge was how much has changed in the intervening years. Of course major advances have been made – but have they been significant advances, or radical leaps in performance? The consensus seems to be “significant advances”. I want to be able to ride with friends that are on ‘modern’ equipment. I don’t mind giving up that last 10-15% of performance, just wasn’t sure if the gap was more than that…

I’ll report back, with some pictures, when the “rad red” Roberson is resurrected!

Aaron

I was in the same boat 5 years ago. Used to ride a lot and even race back in the 70's and early 80's. Got out of cycling for almost 20 years. When I raced I had a Merckx steel frame, Campy NR components, and of course down tube friction shifters. 5 speeds and biggest in back was maybe 21. I could do any hills no problem

When I got back in a few years ago I went vintage. That was the only theing I knew - I had no idea about the new parts and stuff. I did OK until my first large (1,000 cyclist) group ride of 50 miles.. On the first set of 8% hills I did OK, but as they continued to roll and then got up around 10% I started hating my 5 speeds in the rear (maybe 23 was biggest). And those down tube friction shifters were a hassle when shifting up hills (letting go of one side of handlebars/reaching down/shifting was a lot harder than it used to be - and I'd lose momentum on the hills doing it).

So I then went out and bought a modern aluminum frame and bike with Shimano 105 parts and STI shifters. Loved the STI. Hated the frame. It was aluminum, compact, and just a nasty ride.

So I then went to a "modern" classic. Bought a new Mercian frame last year made out of good old Reynolds 531 (Mercian still has a warehouse full of 531). Campy dropouts, of course ! But the rear is made for modern components, so I equipped it with 9 speed Shimano Ultegra and DA parts with STI. A nice set of Mavic OP wheels laced to himano Ultegra hubs, too. Now I have the perfect bike !

...but have they been significant advances, or radical leaps in performance? The consensus seems to be “significant advances”.


Aaron,

Heed the words of USAZorro:

"Ask your LBS to let you take one of their new bikes for a test ride. See if you can't get one that's in the price range you'd be thinking of spending if you were to get a new bike. Then take your old bike (after tuning it up) for a ride. I think you'll find that the newer bicycle will be 2-3 pounds lighter, that you'll have more gearing choices, and that you'll like the braking and shifting better on the new one as well."

I live in the SF Bay Area too, and I love my old bikes. But when going for a ride around here, you are at a distinct disadvantage on an older bike. They are fun to ride, look very stylin', and ride nice, but the technology can be limiting.

Newer technology allows you to shift while on the hoods, gives you better braking, and gives you much closer stepped gearing. Gone are the days of endlessly hunting for a gear that doesn't exist. With modern 9/10 speed drive trains, chances are you'll find just the gear you need to match your effort/cadence to the terrain comfortably. Much easier to shift on climbs, too. Over a long ride this means you will end the day less fatigued, and you will be a more efficient rider.

The bit about newer bikes having "twitchy handling" and possessing "noisy, plastic-ish ride qualities" is, respectfully, hooey. They still make plenty of bikes out of steel, and carbon has very nice ride qualities. Also, many bike manufacturers make comfortable, stable riding bikes that you can buzz on all day and not get fatigued. Giant OCR's come to mind immediately, as do Trek Pilots. Truly all-day, well running bikes.

I love my old bikes, and zip around town on them all the time. But when I go for big yardage, I ride modern. I've done tons of centuries on both, and my share of climbing as well. Modern wins, hands-down.

On the subject of gearing, only my 1960 Capo and my 1970 UO-8 are currently limited to a 5-speed or a 6-speed ultra block; everything else can take 7 speeds, although I am currently running 6. With 7 speeds, I can easily obtain a 6% gear ratio progression with a mid-40s to mid-90s range, which satisfies all of my needs as well as any modern 18-speed setup possibly could. On a 1.5-step setup, I admittedly have to double-shift everyt time I want a 6% ratio change, and on a half-step, I have to do so half the time, but I more frequently need a 12% ratio change, which is just a one-cog step, versus a double twitch of the Ergo or STI. Some of my favorite gearing combinations include:

50-42 / 13-15-17-19-21-23-26
50-42 / 14-15-16-18-20-23-26 (lower top gear, but no big jump at the top)
49-46 / 14-16-18-20-23-26
45-42 / 13-15-17-20-23-26 (a little light on the top end, but superb ratio progression)

48-45-34 / 13-15-17-19-21-24 (40-100inch half-step plus grannie which works superbly with close-ratio racing derailleurs)

I have all the gears I need and as many unique, useful ratios as I would with, say 53-39 / 11-12-13-14-16-18-20-22-25, which would give me 3 uselessly high gears and lots of redundancy.

8lives,

Sorry I missed this up until now, I hate when work gets in the way.

My first question is are you going to ride competitively? if yes than after getting back
into competitive shape you might find a disadvantage in that your shifting might be
a bit slower than those with modern drivetrains, and you're bike is going to be 2 - 3 pounds
heavier.
If you're not going to be riding competitvely (i.e.sanctioned races) but are just going
to be going out with the fast group you should be fine.
The one thing I would look into upgrading would be the brakes. While I love my
delta brakes, and my old campy sidepulls the newer brakes are much better
performing. You can still find brakes that would look ok with the C-Record gruppo.

and regardless of what bossman says, new drivetrains are decidedly noisy compared
to old freewheels.



Roberson frame huh? would love to see pictures.

Marty

I sort of came at this vintage thing from the other side. I'd been riding Al and CF bikes with 8 and 9 speed STI and then fell in love with the classic look of vintage steel road frames. But I didn't have any interest in downtube shifters and clips and straps. So, when I found a Columbus built Caldaro frame, I built it up with a modern 10speed group. Best of both worlds, if you ask me.

As for performance, the Caldaro is a bit heavier and definitely slower to climb than my Trek 5200. But she rides like a dream over long distances and theres an organic liveliness to the Columbus steel that I've never felt on any other bike. On a flat group ride or road race, I don't think I'd be at any disadvantage on the Caldaro. But in a crit or climb, I'd take the Trek.

and regardless of what bossman says, new drivetrains are decidedly noisy compared
to old freewheels.





Marty[/QUOTE]

Where or when is the new drivetrain noisier than the older systems, I ride everything from Campy NR to Dura Ace 7800, and if the system is properly tuned, noise should not be an issue either way. How old or new something is has very little to do with how quiet or noisy it is. BTW, the NR is noisier than the DR. Gotta go with Bossman on this one.

and regardless of what bossman says, new drivetrains are decidedly noisy compared
to old freewheels.


Gosh, Marty..... I know I expended a lot of hot air, but I never addressed comparative drive-train noise ...... :D

For the record, though - I've heard modern drive trains that are sinister quiet, and some that sound like WWII German armor. Same with vintage.

It really depends more on what components you're using, and your component combinations. If you are referring to rear hub noise, some modern hubs make almost no sound at all, and others (Chris King comes to mind) buzz like a nest full of hornets.

I kind of get the feeling you guys are trying to compare the top end of yesteryear with the low end of today.

You really don't have to denigrate new stuff to justify your love of old stuff - it's not a zero-sum game. I like 'em both, just for different reasons. But I'll probably never ride a century on a vintage bike again, and this is based on riding the same routes on old and then new bikes. In every case, I was a faster, more efficient rider on the new technology, and was much less fatigued at days end. That's enough for me.

Some day I will do as caloso did, and marry the old and new. A nice Italian steel frame with a modern 9 speed drive train would be heaven........

Gosh, Marty..... I know I expended a lot of hot air...
...and I thought I had taken care of all the hot air in that little sermon I preached....

meh, I just think my regina or suntour freewheels are generally quieter than
the campy cassettes that I've used, most significantly when freewheeling.
I will say that my ergo 8 speed is quieter shifting than my NR, SR or CdA systems.

Bossman, I was responding to this

The bit about newer bikes having "twitchy handling" and possessing "noisy, plastic-ish ride qualities" is, respectfully, hooey.
sorry if I misunderstood your intent, I took off on the freewheeling issue.

marty

Noise it totally dependant on the hub/wheel, My ambrosio hub with campy 10 is very quiet while my friend 10 speed hub (forget what brand) is about 5x as loud as a cheep suntour freewheel. I however love the Loud click/buzz of the suntour freewheels. The dura Ace 7 speed freewheel I just installed is very very quiet I am guessing because it has a greater number of pawls (sp?) that are smaller.

to me the quiet ticking of the Regina or Suntour is like music to my ears. . .

Originally Posted by bigbossman -- Gosh, Marty..... I know I expended a lot of hot air...

...and I thought I had taken care of all the hot air in that little sermon I preached....
(Pastor Bob)

Is this evidence of an expanding universe?

Along these same lines, a project I'm thinking for NEXT winter (after sprucing up my '78 Kvale this winter) is converting my '87 Paramount to a 9- or 10- speed drive train. It's C-record now, with Delta brakes, and I'm thinking I could gain some riding benefits. I'd keep the brakes and crank, and swap in brifters, BB (if necessary), rear wheel, front and rear derailleurs. I'm thinking Chorus or maybe Centaur. What think?

There have been some super deals on '06 Campy stuff. I think it's a great idea.

Originally Posted by bigbossman -- Gosh, Marty..... I know I expended a lot of hot air...

...and I thought I had taken care of all the hot air in that little sermon I preached....
(Pastor Bob)

Is this evidence of an expanding universe?
My little NH universe is contracting just now, -4 F and falling... but come Sunday morning--- well, need I say more?

8Lives, best of luck on the Roberson restoration! Keep the vintage lightweight faith!

I think most of us will agree that 1960s and 1970s frames are superior to same-period components. There is a reason lots of folks hang new parts on old frames, but very few put old parts on new frames.

Having more cogs on the back doesn't make going up hills easier. Having a low enough large cog makes going up a hill easier regardless of whether you have a 5 cog freewheel or a 10 cog cassette. A 52-42 chainwheel and a 14-28 5 cog freewheel will give anyone not doing loaded touring a decent low gear and a pretty high gear. So the question is, how many gears do you need in between? Since the OP learned to ride some years ago he probably already knows who to pedal at different rpms which means he doesn't need a crapload of choices. With spaces between gears you aren't changing gears every two minutes so having downtube shifters isn't a big disadvantage either.

Newer brakes are easier to use than older brakes but how much brake power does anyone not racing or commuting need? When you think about it you hardly ever use them and even more rarely do you really have to pull on them. So if you have any hand strength whatsoever you're going to be able to squeeze those things into a stop where you're as afraid of pitching over the front wheel as you are of getting stopped.

I think you should just get some nice tires and ride the bike and not worry that your bike can't keep up with the guys. When I can't keep up, it's never the bike's fault.

So the question is, how many gears do you need in between? Since the OP learned to ride some years ago he probably already knows who to pedal at different rpms which means he doesn't need a crapload of choices. With spaces between gears you aren't changing gears every two minutes so having downtube shifters isn't a big disadvantage either...

Question - do you guys have serious rollers out there? How about serios climbs? We do, and having a lot of closely spaced gears makes a big difference in speed, efficiency, and yes - enjoyment. It is a big technical advantage to grab a gear that is exactly what you need, on the fly, without having to take your hands off the bars, and not have to settle for a gear that is a little too tall or a little too short. That's why guys riding modern bikes shift more than in the old days. Because they can, and it works great.

Sure - you don't NEED a "crapload" of choices, but the sure are nice to have. Do a 100 miles with 8,000' of climbing on a 5 speed, and then do it on a newer, 9 speed bike.

I doubt the difference between an 80's roadbike and a modern roadbike is as big as the difference between a 60's bike and an 80's bike.
I'm just curious, if anybody owns bikes from such a wide range of eras, if they could confirm my suspicions on this matter.
I know my 1963 Columbia 5 speed was worlds apart from my 80's Miyata ten speed, but the Miyata did not seem nearly so primitive in comparison to bikes which are only 5 or ten years old now.

I doubt the difference between an 80's roadbike and a modern roadbike is as big as the difference between a 60's bike and an 80's bike.
I'm just curious, if anybody owns bikes from such a wide range of eras, if they could confirm my suspicions on this matter.
I know my 1963 Columbia 5 speed was worlds apart from my 80's Miyata ten speed, but the Miyata did not seem nearly so primitive in comparison to bikes which are only 5 or ten years old now.

Can't speak to the 60's stuff, but I went from riding a 1988 Miyata 215 touring bike to a 2005 Giant OCR.
I rode that Miyata all over the place, and the last year I rode it seriously, I had 8 or 9 centuries on it. And not weenie centuries, either - California centuries with anywhere from 3,000 - 8,000' of climbing. It was a comfortable, nice handling bike, and I swore up and down it was plenty of bike for me and all I would ever need in a bicycle. New stuff? Pshawwww....... for suckers.

Well, just for fun I started test riding new bikes around town at the LBS's. You know, just to confirm my suspicions and get a good laugh at all the suckers wasting money on the new "crap". To make a long story shorter, I soon discovered that there was something to be said for the new stuff, and test rides were lasting longer and longer. So, I saved my nickels and dimes and bought a new bike on end of year closeout, and started riding it around. At first, the differences seemed subtle between 1988 and 2005, but the cumulative effect of all the subtle differences was huge. I was riding longer, riding faster, having a lot more fun, and was MUCH less fatigued after a day in the saddle.

Now, I still have the 1988 Miyata - and I have a 1975 Swiss Mondia, a 1985'ish Eddy Merckx, and an early 90's Guerciotti to boot. They're all fine bikes with different ride qualities, and all are fun to ride. But the Giant always gets the nod if I'm doing any distance over 20 miles or so, with rare exception. It's just a world away from the other stuff for long distance ride quality.

I really didn't want to like the new stuff. I didn't want it to be better, but it is. And I'm convinced that the guys that are claiming the older stuff is just as good or better than new technology either haven't ridden anything new for any length of time, or are just being obstinate. Or maybe they all live in flat country and there really isn't much difference to them.

...And I'm convinced that the guys that are claiming the older stuff is just as good or better than new technology either haven't ridden anything new for any length of time, or are just being obstinate....
Ah! The truth steps forth! Time for confession brothers and sisters. How many of us have spent serious, BigBossMan time on a modern, higher end, road bike? Let PB confess first; not me. This is why I can't make a comparison to guide 8Lives.

Now come to the altar C&Vers. Confession is good for the soul.

newest bike I have spent alot of time on is my 89 Serotta, campy 8 speed (cassette).
Bossman, c'mon I'm in texas its flat, an overpass is a cat3 climb round here.

Marty

A 78 Motobecane Gran Jubile, an 80s Basso with black anodized S Record and an 03 or so LeMond Maillot Jaune with Canpy Chorus 10. They're all steel but the LeMond is oversized 853 and a CF fork. The LeMond wouldn't be considered light today but it's under 20# w/o stripping off cages and repair bag much less the pedals and what-not the weight-weanies take off before their bike goes to the scale.

I guess I need to get in line at the confessional as well. The LeMond gets most (nearly all to be honest) of my miles though I do think my Basso is the best looking, esp now that I've got some polished bars and a Cinelli stem ready to go on it.

And my LeMond even has those "NASCAR" wheels wth too few spokes and a name I can't pronounce. (Well thi is confession time, isn't it?)

Btw the drivetrain is pretty quiet when pedalling but the unpronounceable rear hub does have a very noticeable "click" when coasting.

It's even flatter than TX here but having 1 tooth increments when fighting the coastal head wind does spoil you. I know I rode that same wind 25+ years ago on a 28# Motobecane with a 5 speed freewheel and could do it again but don't really want to.


Forgive me Father for I have (repeatedly) sinned........

A quick comparison of ENTRY level bikes that I own. Mid 70's Motobecane Mirage- like pedaling a couch down the road (dead frame, so so components, beautiful paint job). 86 Schwinn Traveler- better frame than the Mirage, nicer wheels components, etc somewhat responsive. 91 Bianchi Brava- big improvement over the earlier two. Responsive, light, handles well, 7 gears, nice bike. 2005 Giant OCR- Light, responsive (not twitchy) Brakes are far better, shifts much easier on hills, more comfortable on longer rides and it has over 3000 miles on it with zero frame component or wheel issues. I would certainly not classify it as cheaply made or plasticy. I ride about 60 percent of the time on the Giant, the rest on old school, but if it's over 25 miles, you'll see my butt on the Giant. (with the exception of my Paramount which I will occasionally take on club rides of 30 miles or so)

In this case car and motorcycle analogies don't do it for me. When we're talking cars a 20 year old car will have a 20 year old engine, and a new car a new engine. No matter what bike you ride it's always got the same engine.

I love the way a good vintage road bike rides. You should certainly ride it ASAP. Give it some air and some lube, and a good washing, and ride it, then if you want to do any restoration, or upgrades go to town.

If you then feel you want to see what the exciting world of STI, and carbon fiber has to offer, start hanging out over in the road forum and head down to your local bike shop where they will be all to happy to indoctrinate you, but in the meantime, there is really nothing stopping you from experiencing the joys of cycling right now. That's a great bike you have. enjoy it.

Ah! The truth steps forth! Time for confession brothers and sisters. How many of us have spent serious, BigBossMan time on a modern, higher end, road bike? Let PB confess first; not me. This is why I can't make a comparison to guide 8Lives.

Now come to the altar C&Vers. Confession is good for the soul.

A 1992 Cannondale R-800, and a late 90's Schwinn Super Sport.

Rode them enough to know I don't much care for aluminum. Brifters and 105 shifted flawlessly. No comparison to any of my steel rides. No style, no interesting features. The Camrys of the bike world, though that isn't necessarily bad.

I did think about buying a Specialized Sequoia at one time, but the lust for old steel won yet again.

I took this rented Specialized Roubaix on a 60-mile and a 40-mile ride last summer. (Note my C-Record pedals!). I quite enjoyed it. I did notice I spent a lot of time shifting. Liked the feel of the frame, the light weight. If I owned it I think I'd spend a lot of time riding it. Then I came home and got back on my vintage steel. Happy there too.

http://images.kodakgallery.com/photos2643/4/35/12/63/89/1/189631235405_0_ALB.jpg