bmaxwell

So there are the bikes from the 90's that are great bikes... they are light, smoewhat modern, but not newer bikes... yet they are not vintage.... so what are they

Mike Mills

I think you just told us what they are.

P.S. - look at this thread: https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vintage/474125-define-classic-vintage-me.html

bmaxwell

Mike so you had the same question... so there is no real answer to this... what if I take an old frame from the 80's and put an STI gruppo on it... what then happens is it classic or just a pile of garbage?

East Hill

It's a vintage bike with updated components .

East Hill

BengeBoy 

Bargains.

bmaxwell

you guys aer making this sound all too simple... hehehehe.... I am so green to all of this it is not even funny

bmaxwell

call me kermit

cb400bill

Right now the bikes of the 90's are too old for the guy looking for the latest tech advancements. But they are too new for many of the C&V crowd.

So that can make them bargains, if you pick the right bike.

Jerry in So IL

+1! I love my Hardrocks!

Jerry

roccobike

No problem, I just ride them.

Notice the brifter upgrade on the 93 Bianchi Campione.

The other bike is a 92' Nishiki Ariel. I also just acquired a 97 Gary Fisher Hoo Koo E Koo this week, and I have a 94 Specialized Rockhopper that looks like its a keeper. Sorry no pics with those.
This is a 96 SR500 Silk Road, road bike with head shock. I also have a 91 SR400 and a 96 R600. I love those 90's bikes.
EDIT: Up until August of this year, the 96 SR500 was my main road bike. It's been updated with 105, 9-Speed triple brifters, but otherwise remains as seen here.

vjp

The word "vintage" on it's own really means nothing. It implies that it is "old" but to be used properly it HAS to be used with a year or decade, ie: "this bike is a 60's vintage". It is a wine term that "Vintners" used to declare a wine all made from kind of grape but is now widely misused there also.

cb400bill

It is not so much that the word is misused as much as the meaning of the word has evolved from its origins. Many, many words have done this.

RobbieTunes

Nothing wrong with 90's bikes. I just wasn't riding then.
After all, the only 90's bike I have is the only set of 6-sp triple STI's I've seen.

well biked

The thing I don't like about most '90's bikes is that most of them are welded. Most welded steel frames aren't attractive to me, I like lugs. With that being said, the '97 Pinarello Vuelta I acquired recently, with a beautiful lugged steel frame, is by far the best bike I've ever owned. I really can't imagine a better road bike for me. So, generally, I don't like '90's bikes very much. But a '90's bike is my favorite bike.

I think the '90's are difficult to classify in a lot of ways, and not just in regard to bikes-

cudak888 

Fun, provided you like them

I love my early '90s Guerciotti with lugged Columbus EL tubing:

(Old photo)


I consider it worthy of the C&V forums - it is made in the C&V tradition. Lugged steel is always C&V, in my opinion - in the least, classic.

-Kurt

bmaxwell

ok, so this bike counts here? Not that I will lhave it much longer it does not fit me... boo hoo... I love this bike and the way it rides it is just not comfortable for anything but around the block... it is a 54 and I am 5'4" so it is just too big for me...... but she is a beauty

Sirrus Rider

I say it depends. The 90's Specialized Sirrus was the high point as as "common man's racer." and the last of the Steel Sirrus' Same frame angles as the '80's Allez/Sirrus, but with rack braze-ons. The early '90's still had hardtail steel MTB's Some rather distinctive like the Nishiki Alien/Ariel. As for age, the earliest are already 10 years old and not so common.

roccobike

OK, here I go on my soap box.
When it comes to road bikes, I'm 100% with cb400bill. You can find mid-level, 90's bikes with 7 or 8 speed brifters for well under $400. These bikes are comparable, if not better than, new, $800, SORA level bikes. Some might compare 90s bikes to $1000, Tiagra level bikes. Ask yourself, is someone on a new road bike is really faster than someone of equal capability on a 90's road bike. In my opinion, there is very little, if any advantage.
However, most mountain bikes from the 90's would not compare well to a new mountain bike except for perhaps the lowest, entry level models. I just acquired a 97 Gary Fisher Hoo Koo E Koo, a nice mid to upper mid-level bike. It's steel frame is a nice retro frame, but the fork, brakes and shifters don't compare to todays components. Even if I spent the bucks to add new components, the frame design is outdated. IMHO, an average MTBer on a new bike has a distinct advantage over someone of equal capability on a 90's mountain bike. IMHO, unless one acquires a upper end 90's bike in good shape for around $150, it's not much of a bargain.

Bikedued

If it was bmx, it's simple. Mid school. The older bikes being old school. Straight caliper brakes, skinny tubing, 3/8" axles. Once the U brake started showing up, OS tubing, 14mm axles, Gyros instead of rotors, etc.. they became "mid school". Maybe 90's bikes are mid vintage, lol....,,,,,BD

But yes, Bargains they are. The techie hammer heads won't be caught dead on them, and most are too new looking for us vintage guys. Road bike design (at least visually) peaked in the mid to late eighties in my humble opinion. Once you lose aesthetics, why bother? Lugs with near modern components=awesome.,,,,BD

bmaxwell

so since I started this thread, what is your opinion of my bianchi... that is the last one up there...

bmaxwell

i mean does it count in the old school frame of things....

cb400bill

I think it is a great looking bike. I wish it were your size so you could keep it. If I were you I would sell it and replace it with something similar that fits you.

Edit: Maybe you could just buy a new frame and move the components over. Then sell your frame.

RFC

I agree, it depends.

I buy my bikes, first, to ride and, second to collect.

IMHO, collectability of 90's bikes depends on where the bikes stand, functionally and historically, regarding design, materials, and competition.

For example, my main road bike is my Litespeed Ultimate. When I started looking at Ti bikes, that was the design and configuration I wanted, even though the last Ultimate was 2005. I ended up with a 1998 Ultimate with the slightly curved seatpost to allow for the shorter chain stay. This is historically significant because a couple of years later, the ICF banned curved frame tubes. The next phase of the Ultimate with the cutout seat tube was ridden to a number of sprint championships between 2000 and 2002.

So, from my personal collectability point of view, the Ultimate is collectable because of materials, design, and competition. And, it rides like a rocket and looks hot.

Then there are the funny bikes of the late 1980's and early 90's. I am always surprised that there is not more interest in the funny bikes on this forum. Instead, the funny bike discussions usually deteriorate into complaints about aching backs and enlarged prostrates. I find the funny bikes interesting because, historially, they arose as aerodynamics was becoming more important. Even though they became a dead end because of ICF rules, they are historically interesting. In addition, I find the designs artistically interesting. And, my 1987 Team Fuji is a blast to ride.

And what about my 1989 Trek 660, classic Europeon "Crit" geomentry, of which am the original owner? This was, I believe, was the last year that Trek offered a higher end steel, lugged, racing bike.

So, my collecting criteria are, in part, subjective and my collection eclectic.

Maybe it comes down to a Shelby Cobra type analysis: Does the bike give me a woody?

texraid

Just my .02 I would call '90s bikes, especially steel ones with quality composition and components "classics" at this point.
They will appreciate in time and more so after 25 years or there abouts and become collectible vintage.
The quality '70s rides will gain the coveted highly collectible antique status.

USAZorro

So the MTBs from the 90's are vintage?