|
EVC (Eroica Vintage/Classic) verses nonHVC
Eroica Vintage/Classic (or HVC, heroic vintage/classic) is a made up term for outfitting your bike beyond merely a functioning vintage bike and/or riding like your cut from an older jib. It's a full stepping back, thru a porthole into the past, and back into another era of bicycle function. It's the difference between a total Suntour drive train for your Peugeot UO-8, and finding the last functional Simplex derailleurs with pliable delrin. The Suntour stuff has a certain honor (and practical sensibility), whereas the Simplex stuff is laying it all out there, "stranded 5 mile hike back to the house" gamble and all. Today's training ride is an "out-eat-back" with a leisurely cuppa and a big-as-your-head muffin at the cafe,; EVC is a banana stowed in the back of your wool jersey, washed down with a waterbottle filled from a garden house. What EVC quests did you partake in today?
|
I've got enough vintage bikes and hats that i use them regularly.
Here's a sample of bikes. Oh, and the straw hat and vintage cycling vest with built-in backpack. https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...56097c1533.jpg https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...3ea7da9241.jpg https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...2770e31cd0.jpg https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...feb3c50c69.jpg |
It's nice to have a full throwback bike. It tells you many things - what worked then, still works fine now. And then, what works now that is quite superior. My eroica bike reminds me that the ride of an old steel frame can be as good as any. Modern tires and cassette gearing is something, however, that I really prefer.
|
Hmm, I haven't ridden my CA Eroica bike since CA Eroica. That's telling.
|
If you're interested in the past, then building a 'real' vintage bike is worth the effort. Yes, Delrin decays over time, but as long as it works, it's actually pretty good. And there's no walking home either. I've had my Simplex FD fail on me on my Peugeot PR10 during a ride, and all that happened was that I couldn't shift to the big ring anymore. Not really a big deal when your inner is a 42. If I really wanted I could have put the chain on the big ring by hand. As a matter of fact, mrs non-fixie and I are about to leave for a couple of vintage rides (the Belgian Retroronde van Vlaanderen this weekend and Eroica Britannia the next) and a week of bicycle touring in France with two bikes equipped with Huret Allvit, which is a 1950's design. Even though we've got plenty of room in the car, we don't even bother to take along extra bikes for the week of touring in between, as we're both very pleased with how this old stuff works. There is a reason it was used on racing bikes and high end touring bikes BITD. |
Originally Posted by nlerner
(Post 20382163)
Hmm, I haven't ridden my CA Eroica bike since CA Eroica. That's telling.
|
Originally Posted by gugie
(Post 20381111)
It's nice to have a full throwback bike. It tells you many things - what worked then, still works fine now. And then, what works now that is quite superior. My eroica bike reminds me that the ride of an old steel frame can be as good as any. Modern tires and cassette gearing is something, however, that I really prefer.
In many cases, the ride of an old steel frame is not only "as good as any" modern bike, but often superior. Is it because it's "old?" Maybe. Or maybe it's because someone then knew something about geometry and ride quality that has been lost, or has merely gone out of fashion. Conversely there are lots of old bikes that ride like crap, or at least in ways that feel unfamiliar to modern cyclists and perhaps ill-suited to the kind of riding they do. I suppose the lesson there is that there is nothing about being older or newer that is "better" or "worse." There was just as much crap then as now. The thing for me about an EVC bike is that it invites me to examine my preferences and prejudices about what's better or worse, set judgments aside, and experience the ride as it was back then. Time travel, in a way. You may then learn that it is a bit of a fib that all changes in bikes are "improvements" or "progress." Mostly, they're adaptations to the market, the technology available, and the preferences of cyclists of the time. They only seem "better" because they work better with what we have and desire now. But the world is different now from then. Take brakes, for example. Bikes from 100 or more years ago didn't really need as much in the way of stopping power because there were relatively few stop lights and signs and such compared to today. Not only was there less motorized traffic, period, speed differentials between bicyclists and other road users were also much lower. Roads were often not as nice as modern ones, so everyone's speeds were often much lower. So there was probably less need for stop-on-a-dime capability for a cyclist to remain relatively safe. Take modern bike stiffness too. It is enabled by the smooth roads and lightweight composites of today. But is it "better?" Makers of stiff bikes tell us that it is, and some of that gets backed up by "science." But as stiff a bike could have just as easily been built 100 years ago, to race on a track smoother than today's roads, and nobody did it. Maybe it's not better. Maybe it's just a fashion. I will grant, however, that modern plastic bikes are better than vintage plastic derailleurs. So far. |
Originally Posted by Ghrumpy
(Post 20382582)
I mostly agree (I'm not yet a fan of super-low gearing, as long as my knees are holding up. I reserve the right to change my mind in ten years.) And I'm very glad you used the word "prefer" instead of rendering an absolute judgment.
In many cases, the ride of an old steel frame is not only "as good as any" modern bike, but often superior. Is it because it's "old?" Maybe. Or maybe it's because someone then knew something about geometry and ride quality that has been lost, or has merely gone out of fashion. Conversely there are lots of old bikes that ride like crap, or at least in ways that feel unfamiliar to modern cyclists and perhaps ill-suited to the kind of riding they do. I suppose the lesson there is that there is nothing about being older or newer that is "better" or "worse." There was just as much crap then as now. The thing for me about an EVC bike is that it invites me to examine my preferences and prejudices about what's better or worse, set judgments aside, and experience the ride as it was back then. Time travel, in a way. You may then learn that it is a bit of a fib that all changes in bikes are "improvements" or "progress." Mostly, they're adaptations to the market, the technology available, and the preferences of cyclists of the time. They only seem "better" because they work better with what we have and desire now. But the world is different now from then. Take brakes, for example. Bikes from 100 or more years ago didn't really need as much in the way of stopping power because there were relatively few stop lights and signs and such compared to today. Not only was there less motorized traffic, period, speed differentials between bicyclists and other road users were also much lower. Roads were often not as nice as modern ones, so everyone's speeds were often much lower. So there was probably less need for stop-on-a-dime capability for a cyclist to remain relatively safe. Take modern bike stiffness too. It is enabled by the smooth roads and lightweight composites of today. But is it "better?" Makers of stiff bikes tell us that it is, and some of that gets backed up by "science." But as stiff a bike could have just as easily been built 100 years ago, to race on a track smoother than today's roads, and nobody did it. Maybe it's not better. Maybe it's just a fashion. I will grant, however, that modern plastic bikes are better than vintage plastic derailleurs. So far. I was surprised at how well my 1973 Raleigh Grand Sport rode over the 89 mile, 7000' of climbing on gravel roads at Eroica California rode. Wider, lightweight tires (700c x 33.333 Jack Browns) gave me an advantage on rutty downhills compared to the 23-25mm wide tires of most of the other riders. The 5 speed freewheel (that I forced myself to use to keep period correct) made me yearn for closer spaced gearing, and the compact double chainrings were desired as well - 11/12 toothed cogs reduce the need for a huge chainring. The 100 year old design of a Brooks B17 was as comfortable as any saddle I've ever owned. Wool shorts and jersey were quite comfortable in the 60-70's F day. Toe clips and straps were easy enough to get in and out of, I never felt that there was a disadvantage to not being clipped in, and they were not much more difficult to get in and out of - perhaps ancient muscle memory was remembered. The MAFAC Competitions I was running were as good as any brakes I've used, the famous modulation + braking power was more than up to the task. The long legged, lowish trail geometry and small diameter frame tubing made for a spirted ride. The extra 5-7 pounds that a modern super bike would have saved me were more than made up by the extra 35 lbs I'm carrying around compared to my youth. |
Originally Posted by Wildwood
(Post 20381058)
I've got enough vintage bikes and hats that i use them regularly.
Here's a sample of bikes. Oh, and the straw hat and vintage cycling vest with built-in backpack. |
Originally Posted by non-fixie
(Post 20382223)
... touring in France with two bikes equipped with Huret Allvit...
|
Originally Posted by Ghrumpy
(Post 20382582)
The thing for me about an EVC bike is that it invites me to examine my preferences and prejudices about what's better or worse, set judgments aside, and experience the ride as it was back then. Time travel, in a way.
|
The 42 - 23 low gear on this bike is by far the most stout on all of mine, though I don't have much interest in easing it up. I have other bikes for that. My area is flush with short, stiff climbs that add up over the course of a ride and this bike forces me to hit them with speed and to stand on the pedals as gravity does its thing. It's different in that sense from my other bikes that allow me to spin up the hills at a more leisurely pace. I wouldn't be able to hack this gearing on a 'heroic' ride with the big mileage + elevation changes that come with, but it's fun to get a taste. I did ride this on my first century, so that's something I guess. And I do have a matching wool jersey. ;)
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1726/...6a1254_k_d.jpg |
Originally Posted by Sir_Name
(Post 20382924)
The 42 - 23 low gear on this bike..... And I do have a matching wool jersey. ;)
|
Maybe not exactly the direction this was meant to go, but my mind started churning when I read the responses earlier on my break at work, and I've had some time to consider the topic from my own perspective...
I started cycling in earnest about a decade ago, at the age of 19. At first it was out of necessity because I move home from college without a car, but it quickly led to being a hobby and then a passion. My first road bike was my 1979 Raleigh Super Course 12, and since then I've had nearly twenty road bicycles in all, a handful of which I never got on the road before selling, and most of which were vintage. I love riding them, and my most recent acquisitions are among the oldest and most unique. The 1951 New Hudson has pre-war geometry and all sorts of in-house BSA fittings with pre-war designs, and the bicycle is very rugged but generally rather lackluster in performance. On the Carlton Continental I broke the Simplex Durel Grand-Prix 3-speed shifter housing on one of my first outings and had to have that brazed back together, and now I worry about it every time I shift. These two bicycles are rather precious and riding them takes me back to an era of cycling that I find fascinating... Still, the issues with performance and reliability do not pass without angst on my part. Lately I've had my longest riding season in several years and plan to stay in the saddle as often as possible. I've owned and ridden three brand new bicycles, all both with MSRPs of over $2,000. All of these bikes were sold rather quickly due to typical financial constraints of a 20-something with an odd work season, much more than my actually wanting to part with them. They were absolutely better bicycles than any of my vintage rides - better power transfer (especially during acceleration and climbing), faster and more diverse shifting capabilities, and better braking performance. A couple of them were even comfortable to ride for long distances. However, even the 853 Reynolds Raleigh Gran Vitesse frame had a particularly hollow feeling to it. The performance was amazing, but there was nothing spirited about the ride quality. Nor did I like to look at it very much - I think both it and my 2003 Raleigh Team were lovely looking as far as modern bikes go, but they did nothing for me compared to a vintage lugged steel frame with slender rubes and polished components. I even missed the down tube shifters! I'm trying to figure out where my middle ground lies. I realize now that I'm in a position where I could sell just a couple of my nicer vintage bikes to afford a new, reliable bicycle that has that lugged frame and some shiny Campagnolo group set, and am wondering seriously if I should do so. Maybe I don't always feel like toughing it out, but I do always love to ride. Sometimes I think that having a powerful and dependable modern steed might be better for my riding than the old heroic bike is for my ego. Tough choices... -Gregory |
My wheels for today. A true ten speed (2X5) from the early 70's.
Today's ride was about 10 miles on the beach bike path built in the 1970's. It was featured in the intro for the 'Three's Company' TV show, also from the 1970's. The rider is less than heroic but is even older than all these things. https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...1d73906244.jpg |
I keep three L'Eroica era bikes, which I define as iconic, well equipped bikes from the bike boom era. In my case this means a 1971, Peugeot PX10, 1972 Schwinn Paramount and a 1977 Motobecane Grand Record. I consider more modern bikes with short reach caliper brakes to be from another era. I have those bikes, too, including a 1976-is De Rosa Professional, Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra among others.
The L'Eroica bikes are best saved for solo rides. I can use the more modern bikes with short reach caliper brakes on moderately fast group rides. http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/l...psaxhiv9zc.jpg http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/l...psnkxsxqty.jpg http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/l...psm709ruyn.jpg http://i1356.photobucket.com/albums/...psflwa0ljn.jpg http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/l...pscurlqrru.jpg |
A brand of bike named after a significant, recognized rider of an era. Lots of steel, including components. Four, five speed only - tall ratio and single ring only up front. Cottered crank, pedals with toe clips. Marginal but working brakeset. Leather saddle and cloth wrapped bars. One small bidon. Old 'hand me down' 'sew-up' tubular rubber. Oh, and red with a splash of chrome helps brighten ones ride :--)
Grind away |
For me, non heroic bikes have a cog or two and a chainring that would never be used in a bicycle race of the time that matches the bike's manufacture. (I've been looking for a C&V weights so that I can one day ride heroically but apparently folks are collecting them and the prices are unreasonable.) |
Originally Posted by rccardr
(Post 20382477)
Not only telling, but surprising. I swapped out the crank on the Pelizzoli to a compact double and put on Vittoria Graphene 25's, rode it at SOTR and in between.
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1735/...9914d870_c.jpg Untitled |
I put plenty of miles on my Eroica bikes every week and don't have a modern bike any more. For a while I had a modern Trek, complete with brifters, etc but I got rid of it because I found the Eroica bikes to be more comfortable and almost as fast. If I was still racing I'd be all out carbon, electric shifting, etc, but for my type of riding (centuries, commuting, half-centuries, etc.), the modern conveniences like index shifting and clipless pedals only constitute incremental improvements on the old ways, not exceeding the value of aesthetics and retrogrouchiness in my eyes. I also enjoy the slight notoriety of riding with my carbon-equipped friends without giving up ground to them.
I have made a few concessions to practicality. Although I find wool to be far superior to synthetic during colder weather, lycra or similar comes out when it's hot. Also, pretty much every weekend ride has over 5,000' of climbing, including some brutally steep grades (not to mention that I'm an old guy), so vintage racing gear ratios are never going to cut it...my low gears are in the 20s or 30s. |
Originally Posted by nlerner
(Post 20384479)
Almost all of my miles for the last month have been on this one:
|
Originally Posted by Kilroy1988
(Post 20383176)
Maybe not exactly the direction this was meant to go...
-Gregory I think that was the idea behind Eroica... to find enjoyment that comes from challenging yourself, via classic and vintage bicycle riding wise, and to experience a sense of what it was like, back in the day. But, it doesn't really take spending a bunch of money, or riding a certain route, to experience this. And I wanted to here how others try to find that spirit in their everyday rides. |
Eroica is a work by Beethoven, beyond that it never hits me as to what it means.
|
Originally Posted by Rollfast
(Post 20384726)
Eroica is a work by Beethoven, beyond that it never hits me as to what it means.
|
Well, my daily riders don’t really qualify as heroic by any means, as I’ve become attached to the modern cockpit with a wider stance and comfortable hand positions. Likewise the drivetrain and pedals are geared for enticing me to more and longer rides. I’ve always preferred Suntour for shifting and like down tube and bar end shifters as well or more than brake levers that move sideways. That said, I’m not parting with the heroic bits I’ll need to restore these steel beauties to bonafide C&V riders should I get the bug. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:47 AM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.