At what age does a bike enter this category?
Are there some bikes that no matter what, they can NEVER be classic or vintage?

Classic denotes a product that set the standard or the mold for subsequent versions.

Vintage is the very best example of a given product.

Vintage = 25 years or older

Classic is a subjective term, often times irrespective of age.

Vintage is any bicycle 25 years or older. Classic is a bicycle that has already attained that 25 year vintage status and is also considered a major innovation or an example of high quality bicycle.

A classic exhibits a style or feature that defines the era from which it comes from or a type of design that sets a standard.

Vintage denotes a time frame that a item is from

"Define classic & vintage:"

Quite literally, it means "something discussed previously:" https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...lassic+vintage

-Kurt

Classic - Minus 2000
Vintage - Minus 1950

Classic: Anything lugged with a horizontal top tube (or mixte)
Vintage: Anything you have to track down a special "not-made-by-Park" tool for.

-Kurt

Vintage is anything made before I was born, 'cause I'm sure as heck ain't vintage yet.

Here's my $.02

Since there is no real standard or agreement. I would argue that you would agree that:

A "vintage" bike is an old bike or, not current model year. You can even say a 2008 model was "last year's vintage", like a wine for example; vintage 2005.

A "classic" bike is a vintage bike that must meet two standards:

1. Is remembered or thought of in a nostalgic fashion, usually for a certain characteristic or characteristics or quality that sets it apart from the average.

2. It must also be popularly recalled. A few loyal followers does not a classic make!

So, any bike really, can be considered vintage. You can create a certain standard (say, 10 years) for the sake of reference amongst collectors or aficionados but, it really makes no difference what that standard is. A vintage bike amongst one group may be considered a new bike amongst another.

A classic on the other hand must be a well known design that has stood the test of time. Why? So that a great many people can learn of it and admire it, in a nostalgic fashion. It must be popular. The Mona Lisa for example, is considered a classic work of art because precisely so many people know of it's quality. To be a true classic, most people have to agree that it is. You can not define a classic in quantitative terms.

Very few bicycles, in my humble opinion, deserve the term classic. A great many are entirely worthy of such a title, due to their high quality and loyal following but, they fall short in popularity for some reason. A very true classic design will rise to the top naturally, like cream. It requires no promotion, no boosters, no pitch.

+1, that just about covers it.

I guess I'd add that this forum is for people who appreciate certain bikes because of their age, rather than in spite of their age.

Vintage is Mae West. Vintage is old, and cool.

Classic is Sophia Loren, Bridgit Bardot.
Classic can be duplicated in form and function, but not always with the same effect.

Bikes are fun, too.

seems velodad really opened a can of worms. personally I always thought of my Proto as a classic as it was very limited production and the MAX frames set a standard no few if any steel bikes can attain.

if I can put my .02 in, a Vintage to moi is any bike made before about 1985 when friction downtube shifters, brake cables waving in the wind, toeclips and 'hairnets' ruled the peleton

Robbie you forgot Barbra Hale

+ 1 !!!!

Allow me...

Advancments in bike design have accelerated so quickly that they surpass the terms typically used to describe cars.A 5 year old bike is 20 in car years,if you thnk of it that way,20 years is around the cut-off for classic cars.

C&V ~= 20 years old.

*Blushing*

Can see this thread rapidly going downhill and bikes being categorized into...good or trash bikes depending on who's giving the opinion. Better to just say vintage is 'any bike' over 20 years old and leave it like that. Many bikes were built and maybe weighed like tanks, but are still in faithful service.

Classic could mean many things. Is it a brand or model that was eye pleasing or the best example of it's era? Or was it just equipping the bike with the top components available and having a nice paint job as OEM the difference? Bikes with springer forks have been around for a long time, but I haven't seen many examples posted. 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:
https://img219.imageshack.us/img219/8...ingforkrv7.jpg

In any case, it's up to the individual to define what is 'classic' to their eyes or heart and mind. I can't see a wrong answer, definition, or taste to that question.

I think of "Vintage" as measured in years. 20 years old, 25 years old, something in that range, makes it "Vintage."

"Classic" to me can be any age but done in a way that builds upon time-honored, "vintage" technology and aesthetics, with a very definite requirement that it be high quality or iconic in some way.

Thus, Pastorbob's 1960's Paramount refurb Paramount is both "classic" and "vintage," as is a full NR late-60's Cinelli Super Corsa, while bigbossman's 2000-something Cinelli is "classic."

A Bike Boom-era Huffy will never be a "classic," although I guess it would be "vintage." Dog poop may get older, but it never becomes anything other than dog poop.

"Is that gavel in your pocket, Perry, or are you just glad to see me?

The terms vintage and classic have different meenings as has been discussed. The standard that is assigned to cars is 25 years, but I don't agree that we apply that standard here. IMHO, for Road Bikes, I've noticed that any 20 year old road bike is posted on this forum and no one thinks that's out of line. As an example, most of the Centurion, Dave Scott Ironman bikes are not yet 25 years old, but are readily accepted here. Twenty years coincides with the time when aluminum started to replace steel as the prime tube material and that's another factor that seems to drive us to that time period.
For Mountain bikes, assigning 25 years as the time they became "vintage" is just plain wrong due to the huge advancements in technology for these bikes. I would assign fifteen years as a good vintage time frame for those bikes.
As for classic, I think any bike that is truely different and desirable, not just another "me too" bike might fit that image. I have a 1997 LeMond Maillot Juane that I consider to be classic because if it's desirability, others may disagree.
One thing that is very true, this is a very tolerant forum. I've posted a 93 lugged steel, Celeste Bianchi and no one commented that it was too new to be posted here.

"Vintage is Mae West Edit: and Barbra Hale.
Vintage is old, and cool.

Classic is Sophia Loren, Bridgit Bardot.
Classic can be duplicated in form and function, but not always with the same effect."

You can ride copies. But you remember the classics...

Well yeah, maybe, but I have some vintage bikes that are certainly quaint and unique, though I'm not sure classic. And one is a Huffy. I should post some pics, its actually pretty cool for what it is, though certainly not a big dollar item.

I think of classic as anything Eddy would have rode, or before that, but that fits me too!

lol...talking about women...well there's only one I feel was a timeless beauty (she always looked good no matter what her age was):
Catherine Deneuve