![]() |
(Some) old bikes are cheaper and they're fairly simple to work on.
|
as an adult bikes were for me a bonding experience between my dad and I. I used to long distance hike/backpack, Dad used to cycle, we joined the two and started doing bike tours, a few days long to a few weeks.
When my bikes broke my dad, being the engineer that he is fixed them. I never learned. Later in life, about 2007 i bought my first house with my wife, had no time to wrench on cars and motorcycles, and started buying old bikes in order to learn to wrench on them instead, ride them for a bit and/or flip them. Rebuilding a bike takes much less time and space than a vehicle. I did that for a while. I've owned up to 20 or 30 bikes at a time because of this, but these days I only own about 8 or so, all get ridden, and only a few are "vintage". Each bike is purpose built for a specific range of activities. |
Originally Posted by John E
(Post 20611802)
3) tactile controls -- knobs, levers, switches, buttons, instead of today's dangerously distracting touch screen insanity.
|
Originally Posted by raria
(Post 20608476)
I get what everyone is doing here (buying and restoring classic bikes). But help me understand why for my own benefit. If it helps I restore vintage cars.
Is it that: a) Its a nostalgia thing. Many of us car lovers buy cars we loved as 18 year olds but couldn't afford! b) The bikes back then were very different than they are now. For example, the styling and space of some muscle cars have not been produced since. c) The rarity of the bikes make them prize worthy? 1967 Shelby Gt500 routinely sell over $1M. d) The joy of getting something to work? I restored an old Mustang and it was the closest thing a man can get to giving birth! e) Something else? The money difference between old bikes and old cars is several orders of magnitude. I recently saw a listing for a Confente for $17,000. The next highest listing for a bike I've seen was for something like $12,000 - also a Confente. I have not seen a vintage bike of that ilk listed for even half that much, and don;t think I've ever seen a confirmed sale for over $3,000 or maybe $3,500. Stupid expensive for a high end vintage bike is a veeeery different animal than stupid expensive for a high-end vintage car. |
Originally Posted by madpogue
(Post 20611864)
(Thread hijack alert) +1. Touch screens in moving vehicles never made sense to me. Love or hate the two "Car Talk" clowns, they are of the same mindset. They mentioned in one show that dashboard controls should be designed by Fisher-Price. That was at least 20 years ago, and the trend has gone exactly the wrong way ever since,
|
Originally Posted by madpogue
(Post 20611864)
(Thread hijack alert) +1. Touch screens in moving vehicles never made sense to me. Love or hate the two "Car Talk" clowns, they are of the same mindset. They mentioned in one show that dashboard controls should be designed by Fisher-Price. That was at least 20 years ago, and the trend has gone exactly the wrong way ever since,
|
Originally Posted by Stadjer
(Post 20609403)
The difference isn't nearly as big. Not just because the rider makes much more of the difference in performance, but also because the bike was almost fully developped a very long time ago. There hasn't been much room for improvement left.
For road bikes there's weight saving, but that's not really relevant for my roadster which isn't used in a mountainous area. A simular modern bike would have more gears that I don't need, and it would be a bit less heavy, which I don't care about. It would be more likely to get stolen, it would not have rodbrakes and it wouldn't be as reliable and probably wouldn't last as long, even with it's 40 years younger advantage. So my vintage bike outperforms modern bikes on the things I find important. Then I did a 10 speed upgrade. **** that 6 speed bull****. I would tend to believe that things that are more complicated are more prone to problems. However, based on the anecdotal evidence from people that I "know" on this forum- I believe a lot of the reliability and durability issues that get brought up are exaggerated as excuses (or even boogeymen) to stick with "vintage." The very real advantages of exponentially better braking and ease in pedaling make biking safer, easier and more enjoyable. |
Originally Posted by madpogue
(Post 20609461)
If you consider capacity to bore you to death a "metric", then this is especially true. Camry wins hands down. I have to drive a new-ish (this decade) car for work now and then, and I swear, there should be a warning label on the steering wheel hub - "Warning: May cause drowsiness".
https://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/...ison-test.html |
So this raises the question
If you could afford a quality modern bike, would you choose it over a quality classic bike?
Originally Posted by sloar
(Post 20608497)
I’ve learned a lot of this forum and have met a few friends. On the vintage bike side I cannot afford the quality modern bike like I can a bike from the 80’s. |
Originally Posted by raria
(Post 20612330)
If you could afford a quality modern bike, would you choose it over a quality classic bike?
Modern production bikes don’t seem to have the same versatility as my ‘sports tourers’, and don’t convey that same sense of ageless functional beauty. I’m surely biased by having built up my bikes with considerable thought about each piece/component (no period correct or gruppos here). |
Originally Posted by raria
(Post 20612330)
If you could afford a quality modern bike, would you choose it over a quality classic bike?
Performance isn't dramatically different between the two. On flattish riding, it's pretty much a wash. And the America if anything usually feels a smidge nicer on the pedaling... it sometimes makes me feel like I've got a bit of extra torque in the quads. The Emonda's lighter weight gives it a percent or two edge on climbs, and on punchy short variable hills the STI shifting can grow that lead a bit further. In extremely fast group-ride circumstances, the Emonda's higher top-end gearing can also be beneficial, although speeds need to climb pretty high for that to be the case... usually when road bikes are going fast enough downhill to spin me out on the America, there's enough draft to tuck and coast, although recumbents or tandems on shallow descents can change that situation. |
Originally Posted by raria
(Post 20608476)
I get what everyone is doing here (buying and restoring classic bikes). But help me understand why for my own benefit. If it helps I restore vintage cars.
Is it that: a) Its a nostalgia thing. Many of us car lovers buy cars we loved as 18 year olds but couldn't afford! b) The bikes back then were very different than they are now. For example, the styling and space of some muscle cars have not been produced since. c) The rarity of the bikes make them prize worthy? 1967 Shelby Gt500 routinely sell over $1M. d) The joy of getting something to work? I restored an old Mustang and it was the closest thing a man can get to giving birth! e) Something else? You need help understanding that? Weird Mustang analogy btw... |
Originally Posted by raria
(Post 20612330)
If you could afford a quality modern bike, would you choose it over a quality classic bike?
|
Originally Posted by raria
(Post 20612330)
If you could afford a quality modern bike, would you choose it over a quality classic bike?
|
Originally Posted by bikemig
(Post 20608556)
cheaper than a little blue pill?
|
How many of you also still buy vinyl and shoot film? I’m guilty of both. I’m solidly digitized professionally, but recreationally I seem to believe that technology peaked in 1985. |
Originally Posted by Mogens
(Post 20613398)
How many of you also still buy vinyl and shoot film? I’m guilty of both. I’m solidly digitized professionally, but recreationally I seem to believe that technology peaked in 1985. I do not, however, shoot film. |
Originally Posted by raria
(Post 20612330)
If you could afford a quality modern bike, would you choose it over a quality classic bike?
If i were spending big bucks, I would go for custom in steel (Dave Kirk built to be specific) but still the total cost would be less that similarly equipped carbon bikes |
Old cars? I attempted to restore a '68 Camaro about 30 years ago, I went bankrupt, and then enlisted into the army. The car rotted away on my mom's driveway while abroad. Then about 20 years ago, I restored a '81 Corvette.(and realized it was a POS) I then had an epiphany about artificial masculinity and lost interest in expensive, materialistic cars. So what did I do next? Restore a 1970 Triumph 650 motorcycle. These get very expensive, and the urge to tinker is in my DNA. I can spend <$100 on a nice, clean, abandoned, neglected classic bike and spend only maybe another $50-$100 and have a prideful experience without tags, insurance, fuel, etc...
I take pride in helping friends and family by fixing their bikes. Fixing cars is a taxing weekend or two of serious business and getting very dirty. Fixing bikes is a self-paced thing I can do without the commitment of lots of time and money. |
Originally Posted by Mogens
(Post 20613398)
How many of you also still buy vinyl and shoot film? I’m guilty of both. I’m solidly digitized professionally, but recreationally I seem to believe that technology peaked in 1985. Top |
Originally Posted by raria
(Post 20612330)
If you could afford a quality modern bike, would you choose it over a quality classic bike?
I enjoy riding a bike. But with everything else in the world, variety is the spice of life so I like old, new and everything in between. Doing the same thing over and over again is not for me. And I can afford a quality modern bike and a quality classic bike. I don't need to choose. What I won't do is own 2 bikes from a similar era as it does not add much to the variety I enjoy. Disclaimer - I'm no princess and cannot discern subtleties like a centimeter in trail difference, a degree in seat tube or head tube or different tubing types. Now if I had to choose 1 single bike to ride until the end of my days, I'd choose my 1933 Frejus if I stayed in Illinois and the 2009 Cinelli if I moved to somewhere with significant hills. |
Originally Posted by raria
(Post 20612330)
if you could afford a quality modern bike, would you choose it over a quality classic bike?
This 81 Centurion cost me more than a grand to built up. https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4294/...ee0a66ee_h.jpg DSC02402 by Bwilli88, on Flickr |
Originally Posted by raria
(Post 20612330)
If you could afford a quality modern bike, would you choose it over a quality classic bike?
...I just spent a couple of weeks, on and off, dismantling this bike (which I've had for years now), and repainting then reassembling it, with a few tweaks like a shorter stem. To me it seems to have more pride of craftsmanship and cache than a quality modern bike that was popped out of a mold somewhere and hung with a group of components that are slightly more complex, and will allow me a moderate increase in top speed and acceleration, and several more choices in picking a gear for cadence. But I only ride for enjoyment and exercise these days. These are the bicycles that got raced by amateurs back in the day they were new. They are still plenty fast enough for the vast majority of us old farts. And I know it's a cliche by now, but I just can't see myself riding along on a bicycle that has the silhouette of a dog pooping. It's an aesthetic choice, and there's no rational argument for taste. . |
It seems like C&V bikes and mechanical watch enthusiasts follow a similar vein. I don't own a watch without a mainspring. I have a Waltham pocket watch whose movement that was made in 1901. It is elaborately engraved, and the engraving continues between the plates, in places that only another watchmaker would ever see. When I disassembled, cleaned, and lubricated the movement, I was in awe of the craftsmanship in front of me. Parts were decorated and painstakingly polished, finished, and fitted - and no one but the watchmaker would likely ever see them. This watch is 117 years old, and keeps very good time. How many things we make will be around and working more than a century later?
That, my friends, is called pride of craftsmanship, and sadly, it is almost gone. Built-in obsolescense, upgrade fever, latest and greatest, have seriously damaged that old-fashioned virtue. Repairing, maintaining, and riding C&V bicycles is one way we can push back against that sad progression. |
Originally Posted by speedevil
(Post 20613934)
That, my friends, is called pride of craftsmanship, and sadly, it is almost gone. .
Let's see one of your watchmakers put pretty much every piece of information in the world in the palm of your hand instead of just a clock. And I'm guessing you, like most everyone else in this world, don't want to pay for the manual pride of craftsmanship you lament. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:07 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.