Rollfast had some nice art deco models back in the 50's. Then you had bikes with (strange today) innovations like this to address the desire for a smoother riding bike:
http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/8...ingforkrv7.jpg


OK... Me wants one of these!!!!

could'nt we just start an "old bike" catagory?-even though it does'nt sound as good,it's better than outdated or obsolete.After all it seems like every 3-5 years components go through another upgrade that wo'nt work with the previous system.I became hooked on bikes in bout' 86' looking at what was out then as opposed to now they were model A fords or flintstone bikes (no suspension,index shifting or brakes that worked with a 1" threaded fork and a 6 speed freewheel-all in a 32LB package)that we thought were the s***.I still run 8 speed that make my driverain"classic"or"vintage"?The road,mountain and general catagories all deal with the newer stuff that I just can't afford to run ,so,I spend most of my time on the CV because that's what I usually deal with(flippers,donaters etc.)A lot of my stuff is 20+ but not all-can I still read the CV forum--PLEASE(this is the most entertaining as well as educational forum,not to mention opinionated and funny)I do'nt seem to fit in with the others.

"Ford or Flintsone" bikes, huh, my Pinarello or Guerciotti can hold their own against anything made today. I don't get all of the gears, most of them duplicate one another, does not make sense to me, six in the rear cluster is enough. People go nuts over a few pounds like they are really going to beat bike/rider X up a hill because there bike is two pounds heavier than my steelie. I just lay off the Twinkies for a day and loose that much. This weight thing is gone overboard. Most of these carbon bikes will not have the life cycle that steel or even aluminum bikes have. The cycle federations should raise the weight limit upward two pounds so we could refocus on the athletes and less on what wonder material they are riding. This is what killed all of the little shops that used to build wonderful bicycles, they simply could not invest in the material "flavor" of the day, ultimately, the only one who can do that is the big box factory in China.

Flinstone bike my arse.

Vintage: Anything using outdated technology.
Classic: Anything "Vintage" that people are willing to pay rediculous amounts of money for.

The vast majority of bikes(and cars) sold are not high end things of what you speak, Pinarello and Guerciotti would be more like a Auburn or Doosenberg.Quality rings true always,While your Doosenberg is mother sweet I'm sorry but if I were driving from coast to coast I would rather drive my Olds.Reliability as well as parts availability(of the bits not frames) would be the deciding factors,but god knows I would rather own an Auburn-just not as a daily driver.If you compare the middle of the road bikes sold the year of yours and the components on them to the modern day middle of the road bike they have become quite sophisticated.I am the last guy in the world to tell you because something is new it's better but, it is different.Please do not feel as though I have slighted bikes that were classics the minute they were made.I LOVE EVERY BIKE!

I like that. :thumb:

I think there are classic model bicycles and classic style ones. My 98 lugged steel, horizontal TT, non oversize Pinarello frame is not high end or very old, but it's nearly identical to 82/83 classic frames. It's classic style to me.