vinfix

I admit new bikes with all the tech "improvements" are tempting, at least fun to window shop. But I don't race, or even club ride. Honestly, at my riding level, a vintage bike is nowhere near holding me back.

All I have to do is look at an 80's era book that covers racing, and see just how fast they were going on steel frames and downtube shifters. Or, google Tour de France average speeds. In '81-82, Hinault was averaging about 24 mph. In '86, Lemond, 23.1 mph. Fast forward to Armstrong's era, 25-26 mph. Maybe the bikes are faster, or the drugs better, or it's amazing talent.
But as a weekend warrior, "old school" bikes can do anything I could ask & then some!

oberthecat

I agree with the point you make. I think part of what goes on is similar to any industry that relies on consumption. Incremental improvements do add up over time as well as drive people to buy the latest and greatest.

lostarchitect 

For me, a 60's bike is fast enough!

I feel the same way about motorcycles. My main bike is from 1996, and technology has moved on, but I'll be damned if I have ever maxxed that thing out.

Miyata110

I agree and will take in one step further since I plan on riding my stock, '86 steel bike in a few triathlons in 2012. While I won't be leading my age group, I'm sure my bike will still be more than adequate to put me ahead of many people on "superior" machines and probably won't affect my times in the slightest.

Trucker Dan

TDF speeds didn't go up because the bikes got better, they went up because the drugs got better.

squirtdad

I agree to a degree. But there are some things that are real improvments. Dual pivot brakes are one. I find that STI shifting (brifters) is really an improvement. Required no, but it improves my riding enjoyment. Speed....well i don't worry about that too much as the biggest speed improment I will get is losing 70 pounds or so

my bonafides are both steel frame bikes, bought new and still in use
'82 nishiki....... currently running 1x8 with friction thumbshifter

'89 Miyata running ultegra 9sp STI

seypat

For the type of riding I do, there is no need for any new technology. Even if there was, I want it to be all about the bike's engine. You can't really measure personal performance gains if you are constantly changing or upgrading equipment. Now for something humorous, go to the 41 and see how they are debating round vs bladed spokes. I guess to some, any gain you can get out of equipment is important.

Italuminium

No, the drugs got worse. Man, they used to ride on a veritable rapper's lyrics diet: champagne, cocaine, heroine, speed (LOTS of speed). The roads are a major improvement, and training regimes. BITD riders smoked, fornicated and drank a lot more. Anquetils pre game evening? A bottle of Champagne, a grouse and a woman. Training was done on feel and tradition. These days every gram of carbohydrate is measured and these guys spend hours hooked to all kinds of measuring machines. Medical care for maximum recovery rate is much better now. Watch this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnzPNUfLncw

Bikes haven't changed much, I guess. 52/17 stays 52/17. Rolling resistance and aerodynamics haven't changed that much.

Besides, the stages got shorter.

lostarchitect 

I agree with Squirtdad that dual pivot brakes are pretty awesome. I've never used brifters, so I can't comment on those.

kc0yef 

I just like bikes with lugs so when they produce a "REVELL" plastic chrome kit for carbon fiber road bikes I glue it on then I'll ride it...
Seriously
I love 70s lightweights and 90s lightweights The 80s was all schwinn for me prelude premis world I hated the color scheme in the 80s... Give me 70s opaque primary colors and 90s jewel tone but that digital 80's YIKES I never liked it

Puget Pounder

Of course, we have to have constant threads reminding us why we are here

I appreciate CV style with a modern twist. I agree that the general public does not need anything more than old steel and friction shifting. People are only put off by the friction because they know that there is an easier option out there. Tough to convince people otherwise!

4Rings6Stars

Speed is not my goal, enjoyment is. I enjoy pretty, fancy, high tech, flashy...etc and I have more fun on my 18lb. ti bike with 10s campy riding on roads my 700lb. 3 speed could handle.

calamarichris

Why the quotes around improvements?
I love having a foot in both worlds: the carbon-wonder/plastic-fantastic, and my trusty steel sleds that don't wear out and are probably going to still be on some future iteration of Ebay, pursued, admired, and coveted by members our great-grandchildren's generation.
I think we're living in the good old days right now, because thanks to the Internet Age we can have it all and don't have to settle for "more than adequate."
No snideness intended in the quotes, just stating that it's nice to get what you want, and that periodic sampling of all the girls in your harem builds an appreciation for all the others.

seypat

But why exactly is it more fun? Is it because the new technology allows you to cover a certain distance or ride in less time? What makes the new bike more "fun?" Surely, and I mean nothing by the question, you can put it in detail.

auchencrow

Has anyone ever "maxed out" a C&V bike?
How many RPMs are theoretically possible before the bb burns up?

lostarchitect 

No idea! I was referring to a motorcycle when I used the term.

thinktubes 

My burning question regarding new vs. old is "can a bike be too light?"

For me, one of the biggest draws of vintage steel is road feel and comfort. I like the "solid-ness" of the connection to the road that you get with steel. With a light bike, I wonder how much you get kicked around when riding over bumps, pavement seams, and frost heaves.

On the other hand, the CF fork on my Steelman does a great job of handling road shock. I've never ridden a full CF bike, but remember that the early frames were likened to riding a piece of wood.

Other thoughts on old vs. new: For me, there is a line between frame geometry that occurred sometime in the mid-80's. I don't know if fork rakes decreased or wheelbases shorted, but I definitely like the quicker handling frames.

I'm also a big fan of brifters, fancy wheels, and dual pivot brakes. It's great that you can retrofit most of these to older frames.

4Rings6Stars

It's hard to explain why, but it's true (for me). I do think lighter bikes and integrated shifting perform better but that's only part of it.

If I could afford a $15K bike with Campy EPS I would buy one. Do I "need" it? Of course not. A Next Powerclimber would get me to work just fine and I could do 50 miles on the weekend on a Huffy Aerowind... but would it be as much fun? No. And FUN is what cycling is all about to me. I have to be practical in everything else I do in life so I let loose a little bit when it comes to bikes (and cars but those cost more...).

Do I need to drive a new mod'd turbo Legacy GT when the base model would get me to work in the same time and would have no trouble doing 65 on the highway? No, but I enjoy driving more when I'm in a new, fancy car with gadgets and bells and whistles.

It's not about vanity. Like I mentioned in another thread, hardly anybody has ever noticed my bikes or has any clue what Campagnolo is or who Eddy Merckx was. If I wanted to have people look at me I would be riding a bike plastered with decals of one of the big name brands that people recognize.

I like new, nice things but I also appreciate old, nice things--that's why I hang out here and not in the Road Cycling forum where it seems to all be about weight, performance and vanity.

silvercreek

What little bit of riding I do my cheap lightly modified Raleigh SC30 gets me around just fine. I was hoping to shed several pounds before attempting a ride on my newly acquired Paramount. I find it a bit ironic that when I could ride I couldn’t afford a nice vintage bike. Now that I have bought one, I can’t ride it.

Hoss Cartright

Some very cool comments and much of my sentiments exactly!

Brifters and all them gears - When riding in a group and we begin to climb, I see the person in front of me on the modern bike down-shifting the 10-speed rear cluster. "click-click-click" Very cool how they have so many ratios and lose much less speed and momentum than I do.
On my '72 P15 touring Paramount the 5-speed rear cluster had big jumps between gears and fishing around on the downshift with the gnashing and trimming, then time to shift again. Each time losing more speed. I changed-out the cluster on both my Paramounts to identical 14-28 6-speed models and much improved. My '73 P10 has bar end shifters and a NR RD so overall it is a better shifting bike, but with the 42-52 double front chain-ring sometimes on big hills it is some real work. Where the small third ring on the P15 is great on the steep climbs.
So, yes I envy the brifter bikes with 30 speeds in this respect.

Weight - I could care less about what weighs what grams. I've got mud on my shoe that weighs more than the difference between a carbon or aluminum front DR pivot arm. If I were into weight that much, after losing a bunch more weight from my body, the next thing I need to do is buy titanium eye glasses and get my three gold teeth pulled.

Colors - New bikes only come in red, white, or flat black or the combination thereof? And have a bunch of red, white or black stripes running all the way down the frame

Design - A Trek looks like a Specialized which looks like a Giant which looks like a Cannondale which... And they all look surprisingly like the bikes at Walmart only a lot more money

Price - Not too much needs to be said, the price of a production bike would buy several wicked-nice pristine 1970s classics.
The price for a custom frame build and build-up, Yikes! "I'll pass on the bicycle and we'll take the new Toyota Corolla instead please"
And beyond feeling really guilty for spending crazy money on a bike, I'd be stressing out just riding it. Will it get stolen, will I scratch it or crash it? And the wife would be real mad.. Real mad..

Conclusion - We're all on the same page I think. And for me there is nothing like looking down at that Paramount under me and it just makes me grin 'till my face hurts..

OK, I'm done now.

Puget Pounder

A big +1 to this.

wrk101

+1 Modern drive trains have gotten significantly better (some have also gotten significantly more complicated, and less durable).

As far as cost, yes, the money goes a lot further on a used bike, whether vintage or not. But compare old MSRP on entry level, steel rim, cottered crank bikes (early 1970s) to what is available today (adjusted for inflation), and the "bang for the buck" has improved tremendously.

+1 Most of the new stuff all looks the same: Trek, Giant, Specialized, whatever.

Wino Ryder

No, sorry but both my C&V bikes "max me out" on a regular basis. To me they are the greatest, and have had more fun riding them than any other bike I ever owned. Eventhough I find myself getting a little old these days, I can still sprint to over thirty and my C&V bikes seem to have no problem whatsoever 'facilitating' me. I've been around bikes my whole life, and even with my steel bikes with single pivot brakes and DT shifters, I dont feel at a disadvantage against modern CF 10-speed bikes at anytime. Sure the new carbon bikes are sleek, light and fast, but so what,....so are mine. They're just from a different era.

noglider 

When I have more time, I'll explain why I'm a C&V fan. It might surprise you.

I don't have a bike with dual pivots yet. I admit they're good, but mostly because they're easy to set up and get working right and the modulation is easy to learn. They also don't require a lot of hand effort. They have not, however, enabled us to stop faster. Tire traction determines the limit, and it's been that way for a long time. A pair of Mafacs, well set up, will stop just as well. You just may not like them as much, and I'd respect that.

We had a thread a while back about what improvements are substantial. Bikes are simple machines compared with electronics. Electronics (specifically computers) improve at a rate of doubling every 18 months. Nothing else does that, and I think bikes improve more slowly than other mechanical things. To me, the tires and the foot retention are the biggest real improvements, for my kinds of riding. Others would say indexed shifting and the closely spaced wide range gearing. I had one bike with brifters and a 3x9 drivetrain. It was tons of fun, and I prefer that to an older drivetrain, but I'm fine without it, too.

I think the reason old bikes are good enough for is is that they're plenty comfortable for hard or easy riding, all day long. I'm sure the modern stuff is, too, but you don't need a modern bike to do that.

I went on a club ride locally where all the guys were on modern bikes. I couldn't keep up, and others here will acknowledge that I'm not a weak rider. It made a small difference but big enough to make it hard for me. As long as I don't want to go as fast as they do, I'm perfectly comfortable. However, I would not want to ride all day on my 3-speed. A bike that heavy and upright tends to punish me if I ride it too hard.

bikemore 

I put my sister on a bike with downtube shifters and she swore she almost did a header trying to shift. There are a number of things that have only improved slightly, but there is a large group of people who only know how to shift if the shifter is on the handle bars.

As everything looking the same, same thing happened to cars after they started wind tunnel testing them