Cyclotourist

Hi there!

I've recently returned cycling after an extended break. To date all my riding has been on my trusty 2008 Jamis Coda, which is great for commuting and banging around town. Lately I've been doing longer and longer rides with friends (40mi, 50mi, 70mi day rides) which culminated in a two day bike tour from LA to San Diego.

My little Coda has been great and held up like a champ on the tour; that thing is definitely a great poor-man's touring bike (just add bar ends). But now that I'm doing more long rides, I'd like to pick up something faster and a bit more stylish.

One thing I'm having a hard time deciding is: would I be better suited picking up an old steel 10-speed in good condition (or fixing it up), or buying something new? I love the classy look of old vintage bikes but I've also been impressed by some of the steel-frame offerings from Surly (Cross Check, Pacer), All-City (the Space Horse is wicked cool), Bianchi, etc.

I'm not planning on doing any racing, but going fast sure is fun. Since I live in LA, I want a bike that can withstand some punishment from the crappy pavement here, and my Jamis has given me an appreciation for steel. I don't need a bike-across-the-country ride but I'd like to continue doing short tours (2-3 days) and 50+ mile recreational rides. My understanding is that a lot of the old 10-speeds from the 70s and 80s were marketed to that style of riding, so maybe that's a viable option?

Is a new steel bike going to be a lot faster and more responsive than a vintage one? Easier to maintain? What are the pros and cons of these classic machines compared to modern steel bicycles?

RJM

A few of the cons of older steel bikes are the rear wheel spacing, parts that are just worn out, downtube shifters instead of modern brifters, and possibly frame issues due to rust. New steel bikes like the ones from Raleigh, Gunnar, Jamis ect. don't really have those issues, of course. Check out the C&V forum for a lot of advice on what to look for and what is good compared to what is crap. The members there can really help you should you choose an older machine. Something like a "sport tourer" is what you are looking for it seems. A modern bike will be easier to maintain due to availability of parts depending on how mechanically inclinde you are...of course. Not much can go wrong with a downtube shifter, but there is a definite advantage to brifters on a roadbike. I don't think a modern one will be any faster or responsive though, they just haven't changed all that much.

You can save a lot of cash going with an older bike if you know what you are looking for. The prices for steel go from cheap to mucho expensive, so I would figure a budget out when you get serious.

I really like many of the recent modern steel offerings. Raleigh has an entire line of quality go-fast steel framed bikes and those are worth a look. My local bike shop deals in Raleigh and I have looked at the quality of the bikes, welds ect... I wouldn't hesitate getting one if you were looking for a modern steel bike. Jamis makes a line of steel road bikes too. Gunnar makes some made to order bikes that have a good following. There are a ton of independent custom builders working in steel. Rivendell makes steel bikes that have some different features that may help you with your crap pavement problem. I have a Roadeo frame waiting for parts in my house that I ordered through them and decided on it because of the wider tires, higher headtube among other features and I have had good luck with rivendell in the past. Not cheap though.

chasm54

Not much difference as far as the frames are concerned. The components are the issue. Personally I have no objection to downtube shifters, but there's no doubting that brifters are more convenient and that a ten-speed cassette makes for a more pleasurable (and slightly more efficient) riding experience than a five- or six-speed block. And you'd have to spread the stays to get a vintage frame to take a modern cassette.

It comes down partly to taste, and partly to money. Not so much to speed, as RJM has observed.

rpenmanparker 

So the bottom line is if you go vintage, don't go so far vintage that you eliminate the possibility of a 10 or 11 speed drivetrain. Demand 130 mm rear spacing. Down tube bosses for shifters are no problem, because they easily accept screw-on converters that are cable guides for brifters. Don't worry about having or not having them.

I have been saying this a lot lately, but I do feel it is worth repeating: Ritchey has a wonderful, very light steel frameset he calls the Logic. Can't buy it built up, but he makes a great frame. Very sweet ride, best I have ever known (not the Logic, but the very similar take apart Break Away frame).

Good luck.

Robert

bikemig 

Given that you are concerned about crappy roads, make sure that you get a bike that can take a 28c tire or even something a bit wider. Tire size is a big deal. A little bigger tire will mean that your wheels will hold up better, your bottom will be happier, and flats will be easier to fix. So look for a bike that takes what is called a long reach sidepull. The pacer you mentioned takes a longer reach sidepull. Cross bikes can take fat tires and typically use cantilever brakes. Frankly you can't go wrong with a cross bike and that would be my first choice. In any case, I'd worry more about the tire size than "new" versus "old" steel.

Cyclotourist

Thanks – that's helpful! I wasn't even thinking about the difficulty in getting a modern cassette in a bike designed for 5 or 6 speeds. I will ask around in the vintage forum about particular bikes to look for – there are always new things popping up on CL in a big city like Los Angeles.

I've been seriously ogling the All-City Space Horse, but am trying to figure out if it's worth it to spend $1500 on a new bicycle when I could potentially find something similar in a $250 vintage bike – especially when the vintage style of the All-City is part of what draws me to it in the first place. But I'll look around for those Raleighs too – REI sells Raleigh these days, right? The Rivendells are amazingly beautiful but way out of my price range...

rpenmanparker 

Your advice is right on for someone who has expressed the desire for a rough roads bike, a commuter bike, maybe even a bike to carry some goods, but I don't think it would properly serve OP's stated purpose of a go-fast racing type bike. As I understand the OP question, he is more interested in a full-on race bike that can accommodate perhaps 25 mm tires at most. Maybe I am misreading the question, but I do believe your suggestion would paint him into a rather esoteric corner of the market, where I don't think he intends to be. OP?

elboGreaze

If you decide to go the vintage route , there is a thread in C&V called "retro roadies - old frames with STI's or Ergos . Those folks have done some very nice conversions . Good luck and have fun.

RJM

Now, there is a way to respace the rear to accept a 130mm spaced rear wheel. It isn't that hard either.

I have an old OLMO frame sitting around I was thinking of doing it to, just haven't gotten around to it.

achoo

There's a huge difference between a modern "fast and stylish" bike and any real vintage bicycle. Especially if you're doing rides pushing into the 100-mile category.

Can you borrow or even rent a modern road bike for a weekend?

Cyclotourist

You've got it. I've been looking at some cross-type bikes (test rode a Surly Cross Check the other day), and I admire the do-it-all capabilities of them. But I already have a sturdy utilitarian bike in the Coda. So I guess what I want now is a more road/racing oriented machine without sacrificing versatility completely. Definitely up to 28mm tire size is good. Fenders are a pretty low priority in Southern California on the other hand. But the ability to occasionally use a rack (whether mounted to braze-ons or clamped to the seat post) without feeling like I'm committing some sort of crime is important.

It seems like both some new steel bikes as well as many old ones (the "sport tourers" as mentioned) are built with for this kind of riding in mind, so I'm trying to narrow things down further now.

Cyclotourist

Is the difference mainly one of weight? Comfort? This is one of the things I'm trying to figure out.

MikeWMass

Weight is a major difference. "Back in the day" 25 pounds was considered fairly light. When you say "vintage", how far back are you looking? I have a 40 year old steel bike and a seven year old bike. The new bike is a lot lighter (I have not weighed either one, so I don't know how much lighter). Having the integrated brake/shifters, and having the closer spacing of the 10 speed cassette vs 5 speed freewheel are really the biggest differences I notice when riding. After the fact, my average speeds are a little higher on the newer bike, more likely due to the closer spacing of the gears than the weight difference if I had to guess. If you go back 5-10 years there are a good number of bikes out there with (relatively) modern drivetrains and room for at least 25 if not 28 mm tires, as long as you are not looking at top-tier racing models.

bikemig 

Newer steel bikes may weigh less but personally I think weight is overrated. Comfort is based on a lot of variables but, everything else being equal, a fatter tire helps. A newer bike, as others have pointed out, will work out of the box with modern gearing which is a plus on long rides in hills and mountains. Personally I'd still get a cross bike. You can always add a skinnier tires to a cross frame; they can be fun fast bikes for road riding with the right tires. Sounds like the Surly pacer will work for you. There are other bikes like it from a number of manufacturers. Also check out the Soma Stanyan (I think this is a good looking bike), Soma San Marcos, and Soma Smoothie ES. Living in LA, you can test ride bikes to your hearts' content.

plodderslusk

I just did a pretty flat 200k brevet on an 87 Team Miyata with downtube shifters. Great bike for that kind of riding IMO, will take 28mm tires as well. Moneywise you can get a lot of bicycle if you look around a bit for a quality frame from the eighties. My Miyata with Superbe Pro (bad wheels though) was well under 200 $. I am running the old crank with 9 speed in friction mode.

halfspeed

What do you mean by "tours"? Supported or not? What is your budget?

shelbyfv

As mentioned, look at the retro roadies thread. If you can find a nice frame or bike from the mid 90's on, you can easily replace components with newer stuff as you feel the need. Schwinn, Specialized, Bridgestone and Bianchi all had nice steel frames back then. For newer stuff, Jamis has been selling the Quest and Eclipse long enough for there to be some used ones on the market.

Chris Pringle

There a lot of nice steel bikes out there. Most old framesets can be updated if you find a fantastic C&V one. Finding one, however, to match all your search criteria of "go-fast", agile (responsive) and also good some occasional touring (with panniers, I assume) won't be such an easy task. Remember that you will need a fast bike with braze-ons for racks, extra water bottle cages, etc. You will find some older race bikes with those braze-ons but beware, they're mostly for very light loads. Road/Racing steel machines are generally made of lighter skinny tubing to make them feel light and more alive (responsive.) The issue, you see, is that once you start loading them up for touring (even credit card touring) you'll run into other issues: the frame might feel wobbly, the frame/fork most likely won't be designed for wider tires (28-32mm), the frame geometry will not be appropriate either: too aggressive stance (could get painful on long rides), short chainstays that might cause heel strike with panniers, etc. I agree with others that a modern cross bike might be your bet which tend new or at least modern models. Surly, Salsa, Soma have a good following. Specialized has the Tricross. The Secteur seems like it could also work. I've read that the Trek 520, even though it's advertised for touring, is also quite versatile. That model has been around for decades. I'm sure you can find an old one at a good price. From older brands, look into Miyata. The Miyata 610, for example, is super versatile and those come up on CL regularly.

I just looked at some of the bikes you've mentioned. The All-City Space Horse has really caught my attention. I had not seen this model before. I dig the classic styling, 335mm chainstays are well-balanced (just don't go with big panniers to avoid heel strike.) The only downsides I see are minor -- the gearing might be too high for those occasions when you go touring (w/ panniers that is!) on hilly terrain. A triple crankset (e.g., Shimano's M590) should work better for that purpose. I think 32mm tires should make this bike handle super nicely. The geometry is definitely not for racing but definitely for comfort at very reasonable high speeds. If you're not going to enter any competitions but prefer something more in the style of randonneuring (non-competitive long distance events), I really see this bike working out for you. The wider tires will give you confidence on the "crappy pavement" you find in some parts of L.A. and will be ideal for touring. BTW, should you go below 30mm tires, this bike should start feeling too nervous. This is due to the fork design being optimized for wide tires (35mm is pretty wide for 700c.) It's funny, that bike reminds me of this one (see bottom of page) we recently had custom built. Have you taken it for a spin, yet?

cyclezen

I'm really happy to have a few of my old gas pipe from the 70's and 80's, and they still ride pretty nice. Most of having them is the remembrances of the times I've had on those machines.
But if I was gonna get a new steel machine, it would be something from about 2000 or newer. The new tubing is far superior in both road feel and performance, as well as weight. Really no choice...
By new, I mean the top end tube sets, not the stuff which is mostly a rehash of 90's or older stuff.
Yes, it might be more expensive, but considering the life of the frame and the amount of possible use, it's a small difference.
Maybe the newer stainless stuff.
not that you can;t ride on anything, but if you ride an 80's bike and then a newer steel machine, I think you'll notice a difference, at least when you're riding 'unloaded'.
If you want some 'race' feel, then go with that. 'Compromise' promotes more compromise. If you plan on keeping the coda, then set that up for loaded touring. Get a more road race machine as the complement. It's work fine with a seatpost type rack for small stuff. Or a small frame bag.
If you find the right machine, you'll have a hard time pulling out the Coda, instead of the speed machine for the fast, even longer day rides, or CC touring...

sced

The most bang for the buck will be a used bike and there are loads of them on Ebay, a great place to see what's available and figure out what you really want and how much you want to spend. Then you can come back here for more advice and, knowing what you want, shop more avenues in a directed way.

One option is to buy a used or new (e.g., BikesDirect) donor bike for the parts and transfer them to a used steel frameset. Asian-made aluminum frames OEM very cheap and generally carry little residual value. A lot of steel frames already come with 130mm spacing, but older ones with 126mm are easily cold-set to 130.

FYI https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...STI-s-or-Ergos

big chainring 

Take a cruise over to the Classic and Vintage forum. You might get some ideas. I like the 1970's Raleigh Competition for an all around bike. You can build them up any which way and have fine riding machine.
https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...gh+competition

coasting 

There is a decent number of years when steel frames were of the modern rear spacing. All the 1990s should be. My steel bike is from 1992 and modern spacing.

Cyclotourist

This board is a real wealth of information - thanks for all the thoughtful responses!

Interestingly enough, there is a vintage Competition for sale in my area going for about $400 - is this the kind of bike you were thinking of? https://losangeles.craigslist.org/lgb...725664685.html

There's a miyata 610 for sale too: https://losangeles.craigslist.org/sgv...712369977.html

It would certainly be fun to get a classy old bike like that and add some leather bar tape and a nice saddle...

I think at this point it's between something like these and that Space Horse.

grolby

I've gone both ways, and I have to recommend: for a primary bike, if you have the budget, new is superior. I say this as someone who LOVES old bikes. I really do. But a new bike will definitely be compatible with all modern parts, the frame will be in as good condition as you will ever find, the quality is generally higher (technological advances in manufacturing precision have made seriously underrated improvements in bikes!), you're more likely to have good geometry, modern components are generally much sturdier and more reliable. Since I started mostly buying new bikes, I've spent a lot less time fixing them. And on one of my bikes which I've had some consistent problems with, the problem is a part that I bought used (the derailleur).

I disagree. Newer steel frames are often lighter, almost always stiffer (which tends to improve the handling, if not the ride), have better-quality paint, are usually stronger, more likely to work with standard accessories like racks and fenders, assuming of course that you bought a bike with eyelets for such things. The difference in components is easier to see, but I think the improvements in the frames themselves are very real.

Fred Smedley

By 94- 96 oversized tubing had arrived , and for anybody under two hundred pounds why would you want anything stiffer then that. Stiffness is way overrated when you consider ride quality, atmo. So modern tubing buys you thinner /lighter tubing which is of zero advantage for the average overweight cyclist.