As the title says what would you call vintage? I have a 1999 Waterford RSE-12. It's all Reynolds 531 and lugged. Visually, it really isn't any different than anything made in the Seventies or Eighties. I'm not looking to start a flame war just curious.

cs1,

This question has been asked numerous times. The consensus of the forum is that if you think it is a vintage or classic, then it is.

My sense of it:

A vintage car is 25 or more years old, (defined by AACA), otherwise stuff that is typically 40-50 y.o. At 100 y.o., it becomes antique.

Classic is a matter of concensus among knowledgable opinion.

we did this thread already this week

This should really be a sticky.

^^^What cb4 said. If you want to post it, post it. Folks will be interested or they won't be. This isn't a purist site like the CR list...the CR list is great, and I think it's awesome to have guidelines, but that's not what this place has been (at least since I've been here). Most here are very broad in what they like and there is a lot of utilitarianism vs. collection perfection.

Vintage gets defined differently by different folks. A common cut off (the CR cut off) is 1983. Another common definition is 25 or 20 years ago.

Classic is even less defined...to me classic is a bike that in some way exemplifies it's time or type. It's the bikes that were innovative and that people remember. Classics are the bikes that have obsessive forums dedicated to them. Classics are the best of the best. Classic can also be interpreted as built with more traditional methods...like my Marnati being silver brazed, lugged and pin and tacked.

I'm more interested in classic than vintage; most old bikes are just old bikes. The classic AND vintage bikes are the ones people tend to really get enthusiastic about here...SBDU Raleighs, pre-ic lug De Rosas, Rene Herse and such.

25 is one you see a lot in the vintage car world. I use that when looking at bikes personally.

So is this thread classic or vintage? Or all of the above?

This thread is a thread shaped object (TSO).

this thread is an 80s Huffy mtb

Indeed.

Paging the Colonel... I'm waiting for the "let me google that for you" bit.

EDIT: Oh, there he is ^^^

In a prior life Colonel Lloyd was named Jeeves.

The CRlist has an "KOF" (keeper of the flame) loophole clause in their rigid definition of their vintage lightweight bike discussion format, so a bike like the OP's can be included in their "garage" without fear of dreaded "off topic" banishment.

I'm kinder and gentler today. It's Friday.

40-60 years is vintage old for me.......60+ = antique

All depends up on what your definition of "exactly" is exactly.

/thread

Yeah we see this question so regularly it quals as a Sticky.
Bottom line = call it C&V if you wish (others may disagree).

To respond to the OP -
I've got a bunch that meet the 25 yr standard for vintage, but consider my '04 Jon Tallerico lugged steel custom to be about as classic as can be with Columbus EL-OS.

I agree about the sticky. Like I said in the OP there are custom luged steel frames bikes being built today that are basically the same as those being built 25 - 30 years ago.

I personally consider those new ones "Retros".....not antiques, not vintage, not classics.... JMOs

Chombi

I almost said the exact same thing earlier...and I 100% agree with you. Making a new bike from old materials is retro nostalgia...not classic at all.

If folks back then had access to some of the steels around now, there is little doubt in my mind they would have used them.

At first this would not qualify as "vintage" in my book. The I looked at the cranks, Sugino G-8, suggesting 1987. That makes the bicycle 26 years old which is the mark I have always used to determine vintage or not vintage. Guess I now have a vintage Single Speed and Canadian made at that:-)

IMO, "vintage" pertains to age, where as "classic" pertains to style. OP's 1999 Waterford, in my eyes, qualifies as "classic" but not "vintage".

edit- Here's a thought: OP's bike is "classic" but not "a classic". Probably just splitting hairs...

And is then open to debate.

Exactly, that's why this should not be a sticky (sorry Aaron, Colonel). These debates, the way they're conducted, and the conclusions - usually along the lines cb400bill indicates) are why this is such a nice forum to keep coming back to.