So what year does it have to be to be a
 

"classic & vintage" Not modern?

Classic can be anytime. A relatively modern frame that is recognized as superior, in demand, different from the rest (others will add their own requirements) can be considered a classic. Hence the term "instant classic", although in my opinion that phrase is overused.
In the past the term "Vintage" applied to bikes that were at least 25 years old, but this is general bench mark. As an example, if someone owns a 1991 steel Trek frame and says its a vintage frame, I wouldn't expect anyone to argue that it would have to wait another year. Perhaps the number 25 years has changed, but that used to be the benchmark.
An example of a classic might be some of the higher end Lemond steel frames from the mid 90s. Not yet 25 years old but considered desirable and known to be good performing bikes (wish I had one).

We might not be able to define it, but we know it when we see it?

My only bike is a 1993 Specialized Road Bike. It is in very good condition. NUFF SAID!!!!!

Actually, some of the Specialized carbon frames from that era are a good example of a frame that isn't vintage, but is considered a classic by some (including me).

Late 80s is a benchmark used by a few for various reasons. In 20 years, will Carbon bikes produces in their 100,000s be vintage? I thing Anything after about 2000 will always be modern to me.

How many times does this question crop up? More than enough, that's for sure. And we never find common ground to agree on, let alone answer the question. So...

Why not follow the example of the vintage car industry and go with 25 years old and older? I guess it really doesn't matter, when you stop to think about it, unless, of course, you are attempting to answer the OP's question. For my money, vintage is always going to be defined by the age of the bicycle and that age is 25 years old or older.

Course, that is just me and my opinion.

We are a lot more open than something like
Lightweight Classic Vintage bicycles
or
REGULATION. EROICA CALIFORNIA | PASO ROBLES CA | 11 - 12 APRIL 2015

2014

It just has to be Celeste.

http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment...9&d=1438112761

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=467639

The last mass-produced bikes that fit the mold are the 853 Lemonds.

Here are some not-agreed-upon thresholds from which you may select your level of snobbery...

No pre-1972 bike boom (for the real snobs)
No 700c unless sew-up
No Asian manufacture
No welding ("electroforging" permitted by grandfather clause)
No indexed shifters
No ratcheting shifters
No aero brake levers
No brifters
No dual pivot side pull brakes
No V-brakes
No freehubs
No threadless stems
No suspension
No painted components
No Asian components
No Shimano

I use the demise of Suntour as the 'vintage' cutoff for bikes.

Not that it matters to me.

If it's cool and old, or cool and new - it's still cool. :thumb:

This was being debated here 11yrs ago when I took out membership. My bike was an '85 Trek 460 and 19yrs old. Back then it was on the edge of C&V. Now? Trek racers are prime stuff. Times change.

Oh really... I have a mid 90's Lemond Alpe D'Huez, not the exact bike pictured below by similar. It's too small for me so I'm thinking of selling the frameset. It's about a 56cm ctc st. I can more exact measurements when I get back home in a week or so. Would you be interested? Make your wishes come true...

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...0/orange1a.jpg

I almost bought one of those. Couldnt get the guy to budge on the price and it needed a new brake lever.

Great bike. Rides like a mustang ( the horse not the car, though I haven't ridden either...). Strong, swift, and if you're not paying attention it'll throw you off.

Sometimes, the threshold is attitude, or innovation that carries on a while. Still, a fairly finite set of parameters.

Steel lugged bikes simply generated a following that exists today, long after the "mainstream" bike has gone from steel to aluminum to carbon. Builders still build them, buyers still buy them, and people still ride them. To say they're not classic is difficult to support, when many are going for $2500 or more, frame only, when new. The "basics" of them have not changed a whole lot. Go to a classic show, though, and it's very easy to see the differences in "classicity" between a 1933 Frejus and a 1974 Super Corsa and a 1989 Parmount OS. I'm sure there are differences between riders on different continents, as well. Is a Trek 760 a classic in Europe, and is a Moser Leader a classic in Boston? Not sure.

Some look at the components, from rod brakes, hand-shifted chains, and rudimentary engineering through to the now "classic" downtube indexed shifting. I put the latter in the classic "looks" department. Some are brand-oriented, some are not.

Then, there are some carbons considered classics, from the carbon/lugged models like the Line Seeker to the previously mentioned Specialized models, and include Treks, Alans, and other models. These have a classic look, and some actually ride fairly well, but not all. The carbon turning point, to me an many others, came when some Aegis employees split from Maine and headed west, generated some capital, and unleashed the Kestrel 200 series models. They are becoming "classics" in their own right, both for age and a design which was ahead of it's time and has held up pretty well for 29 years or so. Roccobike's Lemond Maillot Juene is often considered an "instant classic," and fits the narrow definition I have in mind.

Other classics are either unique, or famous, or infamous, overhyped, underhyped, or just plain superb in their own right. It takes all kinds. Japan's cycling culture has trends that seem to come and go very quickly, and would a classic one day be passe the next, and if so, be eliminated from being classic?

I suppose, when people make these kinds of choices, there will be less consensus than grudging give and take.

1899

1977

Umm, no. 1983

No Wait.....1966

I dunno

Whatever blows your skirt up.

"Celeste" is one of those Girly Bikes :)

THats funny i said the same thing in 1997, that anything after 1986 is to modern of a bike to be vintage, After seeing the changes the Bicycle technology has gone through... i was way off.

July 27th 1986 to be precise

Interesting question and I've been pondering it since the last time someone asked it here. I know for some folks the time when brake cables started being routed along the handlebar is the cutoff point for vintage. For me, the classic age lasted a bit longer: when top tubes stopped being horizontal and started sloping back towards the seat tube. I think quill stems disappeared around this time.

As for classics, not all vintage bikes are classic but the Kestrel mentioned today is a classic in my book. It was years ahead of its time and despite its age, it still looks modern and wouldn't look terribly out of place at a triathlon among the Cervelos and Felts.

For me it's the end of the c-record era. I don't care for much after that.

Gorgeous!

As a child I used to press my face against the window of Nino Bosari's sea of Celeste lightweights.
The only place in Melbourne that sold Bianchi's in the 70s.

Bosari's is now a fashionable cafe with the neon sign still above the building and Bianchi's are sold in dozens of LBS's

Proud owner of a 2014 Sempre Pro but not quite the same riding experience as a steel framed 1970's Bianchi. Was looking for a year here but nothing came up in my size.