(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.

(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,

a). Lots and lots of a). All my regular riders are frames I drooled after as a kid with no money,and was able to find and get as an adult.. (Old lugged steel frames plus Campy triple 10 speed components is my sweet spot.) I love the way my bikes look, and I love the way they ride. But it is all an outgrowth of a).

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.

I loved them. May Tom Magliozzi rest in peace. I never heard that quote of theirs, and I agree strongly. When you're driving, you don't want your manual or visual dexterity to be stretched to the maximum. In fact, I have an idea for a consumer product (not a bike or car) that might be patentable, based on the Fisher Price idea. I might begin making it soon.

"Body by Fisher. Brains by Fisher-Price."

For all the time I've had bikes- I had 6 speeds in the rear. I figured I had no need for any more than that.

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.

Perhaps this goes to why there's people that like to ride on 20mm tires because they "feel fast."

https://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/...ison-test.html

If you could afford a quality modern bike, would you choose it over a quality classic bike?

If we're going by CPI-adjusted MSRP, my grandfather's '79 Fuji America cost about the same as my '16 Emonda ALR. I've had the America for slightly longer, and have clocked a few more miles on it. I don't dislike any of my bikes, they each have their own character.

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.

Nope.

Over time? Definitely!

I worked in a record store in the eighties; I consistently bought lps at thrifts when they were plentiful and cheap. I have no idea how many records I have. Hell, I have an ample collection of shellac (every one bought at a thrift for fifty cents or less, ranging from Paramount Blues 78s to rare rockabilly on the King label). CDs are now plentiful and cheap and I've amassed a pile of them, too.

I do not, however, shoot film.

I could afford a quality modern bike....but would go for classic (case in point: the cost of getting my latest frame and putting a full new 105 group on it (had wheels) was not a lot of difference from the cost of these colnago closeouts 2017 Colnago C-RS Shimano 105 Carbon Road Bike CRRW 56s = 58cm [C7CR0556RW] - $1,199.00 Velomine.com : Worldwide Bicycle Shop, fixed gear track bike wheelsets campagnolo super record vintage 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.

I shoot film, but I'm also into vintage cameras and process.

Top

Well, to answer your first question, e.

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.

NOPE.
This 81 Centurion cost me more than a grand to built up.

DSC02402 by Bwilli88, on Flickr

...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.

Bull****.

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.