Kind of an odd question to ask on a forum devoted to bikes that are pretty much already 20 years old and older.
Perhaps, if I was the kind of guy checking out kindergarteners for my future wife, I could answer that.
I'm already seeing a slight trend toward the early Kestrels as "classic" carbon, mainly because the genre is still being established.
Some early Trek OCLV's will be hot, already are. Where there's a niche, there's a market.
Chris Klein's frames are starting to gain some steam for older aluminum, and the Cannondale fans have always been around.
I'm pretty sure what's collectible now will still be collectible in 20-40 years, since we'll die and the bikes will not.
I'd buy what's collectible now, and hope your market doesn't die with the present fans. Or get a Wraith Fabrications frameset.
Current young cyclists did not grow up wanting the Pin' that Big Mig rode. They are more impressed with performance than art.
There are exceptions, but I think we represent a larger fraction of the past market than younger cyclists now who favor steel.
Fine craftsmanship in metal is a whole different animal than quality control processes in modern carbon.
As the frame and components tend towards artistry, I think the collectable nature may increase.
As everyone knows, art is in the eye of the beholder, or the lemmings if a certain beholder has a following.
I highly doubt the Tarmacs and Madones of today will be treated any differently than the myriad of alumi-carbon models made available from about 1995 until now...
As an example, my brother-in-law bought a 1953 Corvette in 1963, with only half a nod towards "investment." Then he bought a '57, and then a '63. When the values went through the roof, he "predicted" that the 1982 model, the last of the body style of that era, would be a good investment, and he sold his '72 big block to buy a new one. It didn't work out very well.
Plus, who knows if ISIS will let us ride bikes?
Last edited by RobbieTunes; 08-30-14 at 09:06 AM.