RobbieTunes

We all must recognize, myself included, that the Classic & Vintage door was labeled before we all got here, and we just entered, whether because our bicycle interests fit the category in any vaguely defined way, or because we wanted them to, or by accident, or because we simply thought so.

Someone started the forum, called it Classic & Vintage, and we've been belaboring the point ever since, from haphazard guesses to stated absolutes, when really, maybe we should just drink more and talk about bikes. My apologies if I was too harsh. I may have mistook the OP for a troll, just reading the words, and attempted to flush him from hiding, like a pointer to a pheasant.

To me:

Classic is Sophia Loren or Ingrid Bergman, as there are different kinds of classic. OK, maybe Katherine Hepburn (but that's like defining "cute.")
Vintage is Marlene Dieterich.

ThermionicScott 

To be sure, it's easier to wrap one's head around an exact definition, such as what l'Eroica and Classic Rendezvous use. But the history of the bicycle is a history of innovation and wildly different ideas, so any attempt to nail down specific traits will exclude something (you can find examples of threadless headsets, cartridge bearing hubs, non-lugged aluminum frames, sloping top tubes, and indexed shifting surprisingly early in this history.) That is why the creators of this C&V forum deliberately left the term undefined. It's a big tent, and while it spurs discussions like these that may frustrate some, I like it that way. It was a fair question to ask, though.

Darth Lefty 

There are BSO's of all vintages. There are a lot of 1970's Free Spirits on the Craigslists. Huffy and Murray were around for a long, long time and they made bikes for any department store who could afford to have the decals printed. Lots of them have cool loop frames, fenders with lights, top tube tanks, and other fairings. Does that pass your "industrial art" definition?

The default desirable bike in this forum is not just a certain age but also a road bike, of an age that it's still maintainable. That largely excludes a wide swath of people who go elsewhere on the Internet for community, especially for kids' bikes but also for cruisers and antique bikes.

Darth Lefty 

FIFY

https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vi...l#post17213937

KonAaron Snake 

I think there's a definite focus in this forum on utility and function, hence why I think we tend, as a group, to eschew cruisers and other tank bikes like that alluded to above. There are also other forums where these are discussed more in depth. It isn't just roadies though...plenty here love their porteurs and MTBs (converted or otherwise). The drop bar MTB thread is one of the most popular here - and I think it's because it focuses on creativity and function. Most of us agree that vintage has a somewhat different meaning when MTBs are involved...and I think a lot of us agree that may of the higher end rigid MTB frames are classic regardless of how we define their vintage status.

repechage

Back when Road and Track was a decent magazine.
Stan Mott, Classic.

Flog00

I've posted pictures of my Tomii build in C&V, built with a "classic" look in mind. It's so new it's not even completed

I haven't heard any complaints.

So is my Tomii a classic? To me it is!

jr59

I'm pretty sure I understand the Vintage part of it; BUT the Classic part gets overlooked and misunderstood here a LOT!
I don't have near as many bike as you, but I have more than some people on here. Most of what I have are thought of to be KOF type stuff, yet posting here has always been problematic with them. My Ellis, DeSalvo, RS, and Spectrums are all built on classic lines, yet not though of as Classic on this forum. It's ok, cause I have more than I need of the 90's type as well.

To me, it's all good!

cb400bill

Sad, but true. I allowed my subs to cycle world and road & track to lapse when Peter retired.

KonAaron Snake 

It's quality where you excel. I'm biased - your tastes and my tastes are very similar. We like a lot of the same builders and I think it's for the same reasons. We also have similar approaches to builds. I think all of your bikes are firmly entrenched in the classic category...and I don't think many here would disagree. A lot of us have this kind of preference - classic, more modern steel and titanium. Call it KOF, call it classic - whatever - they're awesome bikes. Most of the CR list crowd have bikes like this...they just don't talk about them on the CR list!

obrentharris 

Now that's classic!

Brent

repechage

Maybe you meant Audrey Hepburn? She would get the classic and cute vote I am pretty sure, Breakfast at Tiffany's…

rootboy 

Audrey. Timeless. One notch above classic.

RobbieTunes

See? what do I know about classics?

rootboy 

I dunno. That trike you're riding there is definitely classic.

crank_addict

haha- When you mentioned French 'Leotards' in the C&V FS thread / post....

Thoughts of a young Brigitte Bardot

Salubrious

That's 'Lyotards' right??

mobilemail

To quote my favorite gearhead author, Peter Egan, a Classic is "Something that never gets old, even when it is."
Best definition yet.

randyjawa 

Classic, in my mind, is something that helps to form, define or add to a class of something, such as bicycles. Put another way, the first road bike helped form the class, all others since then have helped to define or add to that class of bicycle.

Vintage is a measure of time, sort of. In the bicycle's case, and in my mind, to be vintage a bicycle must be 25 years old or older. And if you think department store bikes won't have value one day, you are not looking at the past. It has already happened. Again, my opinion.

armstrong101

Question on L'Eroica's bicycle requirements. Isn't there a bit of an inner contradiction in them?

They "require" bikes be made before 1987, but also allow modern steel bikes that basically look like old bikes. I understand the reasoning for this - cause not everyone can conveniently get their hands on a "real" old bike, and they'd like to encourage new riders who may only be interested in having/or have already bought a modern steel bike to help the continued growth/interest in vintage steel bikes (by allowing newbies to use what one may call vintage "replicas"). Hope that made sense to you.

But the contradiction occurs in that, by allowing modern steel into the race, it doesn't make sense that a bike in 1988 isn't allowed to compete. A bike made in 1988 is not "old" enough and hence, isn't allowed, but a bike made in 2014 that looks like an old steel bike, is. But the 1988 bike, by all measures, is more more authentically vintage than the 2014 bike. Further, the 1988 bike isn't new enough to get into the race under the "modern steel" exception. At what point is a modern steel bike too old for the "modern steel" exception, yet too new for the vintage steel requirement? Nothing of the sort is addressed in the rules, so presumably, there is no standard.

So... a bit of a gap in the logic of the bicycle requirements, no?

OldsCOOL

Says it all, right there.

RobbieTunes

Go ahead, argue with Italian bicycle officials.

I think they consider that an equal sport.

Whether their rules are contradictory or not, they're set. They also aren't real big on non-European males under a certain age, so go figger.

It's still a grail ride for me, and I'd build a bike for it if I was ever in position to do ride it.

qclabrat

I recall discussing this earlier this year to qualify C & V,
Think we landed on Vintage being older and Classic about 20 to 40 years old

for simplistic perspective, the common observer would think a Vintage bike belongs in museum
whereas Classics are overlooked at garage sales and thrift shops because it was too heavy or lacked sufficient gears

ThermionicScott 

The spirit of the law is easy enough to understand.

We're talking Italians here. Cultures other than ours are often more comfortable with contradictions, even embrace them. Quit approaching it like an engineer.

I doubt the pre-ride inspection involves judges whipping out catalogs and serial number databases to verify frames and parts made before 1987, so a 1988 frame would probably pass muster as long as it's not sporting brifters and carbon wheels. I welcome correction from anyone who's gone through the process.

Darth Lefty 

I'm still hung up on the road bike thing. Just read this statistic... Road bikes from the 1960's and earlier are rare indeed, from the 70's they are common. This adds collectibility but I don't think it makes the older bikes better in any other sense.

Bike boom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you discount children and the elderly, that's probably about one per dozen adults in the country buying a bicycle that year.