I could be wrong but I believe a "Classic" geomentry, especially for the late '80s period, was ideally a 73.5 or so parrellel nominala nd the working the size of the bike around that. Other than shorter stays and that stupid craze of making carbon bikes with that sloping TT so people who should ride a 59 look like they are on a 56 I don't geomentry has changed alot.

I think (I don not own any modern steel beside my bargin basement Bikes Direct Motobecane cross) but I think unless you get up into semipro to pro level bike the steels are likely not nearly as nice as the late '80s. So while the geomentry may be the same a '88ish Trek 520 will not have the same feel as a new 520.

And Ti? My first experience with Ti was a bit a of disapointment but I was not riding alot when I bought it, and while the geomentry was pretty 'classic', something just never felt right about it. I now have a different Ti but with a much beefier frame design and it rides more like a steel but but is heavier than the 1st Ti bike.

Lastly all bikes are different and feel different and I think that is one of the many thngs we all love about them. I think it is very hard to compare the ride of two bikes that were built 30 years apart. If one were to stay with the same brand it may be easier to tell wether their 2013 Unatainum/carbon/angle hair composite frame rides like their '88 top shelf 531 but maybe not.

Does any of this make sense or am I delerious from the heat here?