Is it throwback or is it something else, like a return to what works?

Steel was the material of choice up for nearly all bikes until the late-80's/early-90's. Both for professional racing as well as for utility and recreation. The divide between a PX-1 and a U-08 wasn't that great, in the grand scheme of things. They look similar and could be used for similar purposes, granted with varying degrees of success.

Then aluminum became viable and the professional racers moved towards it. At the consumer level, aluminum (like steel) is functionally quite suitable for recreational use. It is durable and resilient. The divide between the real world recreational aluminum bike and the professional racing version would be wider than before, but still easily bridgeable. Consumers go along with it.

More recently, the shift has been towards carbon fiber. Now the divide between the every day recreational CF bike and a full carbon racing bike is put in a strange relationship. While great for shaving precious micro-seconds off racing times, a full CF racing bike is a lousy choice for a casual ride around the park, getting groceries, commuting to work. Consumers go along with it until they realize that it is really silly to take their Ferrari bike on a 5 minute ride to the store. People begin to figure out that once upon a time, there was a better tool for this job and it had nothing to do with the racing world. So, now we have this recent increase in steel framed commuter bikes, that also by their inherent design don't look like war machines or space ships. I challenge you to find a Paramount or International era racing bike that is designed to look aggressive the way many modern racing bikes look.

I know that is very simplified and full of holes. But, I am not sure if the fairly recent re-discovery of steel is all about nostalgia. Some tools and materials are clearly better for certain tasks. Sometimes we (people in general) will collectively deviate from practicality in the name of fashion before returning to what works. The movement towards smaller crossover SUVs might be an example of this. Many will still argue that these cars are still ridiculously over-sized gas guzzlers. But they are still an improvement over the piggish post-9/11 H2's, Yukons and Sequoias of a few years ago.

If this is a return to elegance and practicality for America, then I welcome the change.

Well, I didn't mean to take it out on Velognome's bike like that. I've read enough of his posts to know that he's got great taste in bikes and if he says it's a good bike then I believe it. I'd just rather see a new look that wasn't garish or selfconscious. But you're right. It is all just style in the end. The tech is certainly unabashadly new and quite functional. And I guess if I like the look of my old Raleighs why shouldn't I like the look with all new parts? Well cause I'm a stubborn old curmudgeon who can't afford a new bike, that's why. But maybe I'll soften up some day. I liked my Raleigh USA MTB just fine. Sure looked a lot like some of the Huffys I've flipped over the years. I wonder why I kept the Raleigh and let the Huffys go.

The where and the what ...

I feel like Raleigh pretty much died in the US in 1980. After that, there was something that was called a Raleigh, and had model names we'd always associated with Raleigh, but it wasn't actually a Raleigh. It was maybe a Huffy and maybe Giant (and nothing wrong with a Giant, but it seems better to call it a Giant than to call it a Schwinn or a Raleigh). The name "Raleigh" was worth something because of what Raleigh had always been, and the name is all that transferred to Raleigh USA in / about 1980. Since then, in the US, there isn't a Raleigh. There is a brand with Raleigh labels, but that essential thing that initially created the value of the name plate has long since been purged from the brand.

Sturmey-Archer, on the other hand, has retained the essence of Sturmey-headedness, even though it, like Raleigh, is no longer made in the UK. Sturmey 3 speeds available today are clearly related to the 3 speeds of 30-70 years ago, and in many ways are actually better. Even the newer products, the S3X and the S80 seem (to me) to reflect the quirky yet effective flavor of the original.

Although both have moved to the Pacific, Sturmey is still recognizably Sturmey; Raleigh is not. For that matter, Brooks still seems like Brooks; Cannondale is (to me) fading fast.

I once owned a Nishiki and currently own an AMF/Hercules. The Nishiki had "Hand crafted by Kawamura" and that's what it was. The Hercules/AMF is recognizable as a Nottingham Raleigh in spite of the decals and badging. it has retained that which makes a "Sports" a "Sports" badge notwithstanding.

The distinction needs to be made between what a thing "is" and what the thing is represented as being. I feel that modern Raleighs, Moto's, and Schwinns exist in that no man's land where what's legal and what's ethical leave each other alone.

(edit) It really doesn't have anything to do with where they're made. The dirty work was done in a boardroom.
(another edit) The funny thing is, Hercules itself basically died in 1960, several years before my bike was built. It says Hercules, but we're not fooling anyone with what it says, when what it is is so immediately recognisable.

this isn't an issue I know much about, but I'm all for producing new bikes that look/feel like c&v rides -- perhaps even improve on them. I think manufacturers also understand there's a market here but they have yet to really produce a really good, affordable example that I'm aware of. I wouldn't doubt that Bianchi has some decent offerings though.

i see no reason such bikes would need to emulate the styling of the old ones. They could be completely new/distinctive on that front.

my 2 cents.

Yup, sometimes I feel like I'm tooling around in an Eldorado or Riviera when I'm out on it. It bothers me sometimes, other times I could care less, sometimes it's brought about some interesting encounters. But ya, it is kinda over the top. It was my fall from the podium of "Good Taste" and so far it's been kinda fun. Hey, Sailorbenjamin, Do ya think cream...... tyres:rolleyes: ...... would work on it?

I will agree with the completely new and distinct sentiment, as long as it doesn't sway too far into the category of change for the sake of change. If steel tubes are the best realistic choice to ride around the city, then that's what I want. There are good reasons why bikes (and hammers and coffee cups and socks...) haven't needed any drastic improvement on the consumer level in recent years.

How much has the Dutch style city bike changed in the last 50-60 years? Not much beyond modern components.

All that being said, I'm not opposed to there being the high end racing stuff. There is a place for it. It's just frustrating when that is where so much of the focus is placed and then shoe horned into places it doesn't fit.

Well, when I said garish I was thinking of some of these crazy looking racing bikes with the matching lycra and when I said self self conscious I was sorta thinking of that new paramount that got posted last week with the chrome lugs and the carbon fork. More the trend than your bike, really. If you want to try some cream tires...tyres... you can borrow the ones off of my old Raleigh. They're exactly like the ones that came on the Competitions in '74.

Living in the city, a cf bike would stand out like a naked lady on the subway. They are really flashy, brightly colored and have huge type on them. I love the fact that my bike is subtle but sweet. I also think it is a great thing that these companies are paying proper respects to such an iconic time in bicycling history.

Oh, and I also think these bikes are perfect for people who love vintage steel but want modern components without having to build it themselves.

Thanks but I'll leave well enough alone......my sons won't ride with me if I put cream tires on it. I was just poking you about the Old English comment at the begining oth the thread with 'tyres" remark.

to be more accurate, it's not like an Eldorado, maybe MGA Kit car build with good parts. Garish in a reserved British kinda way.

I have this sorta perverted desire to customize one of those kit cars some way. Maybe Baja the poor thing or something like that. Yeah, a Baja MGA with cream tires...tyres.

Didn't Top Gear UK do a very crude off-road Bentley a couple seasons back?

It's all good. Ride what you like. I personally just don't like retro styled modern bikes. They are an odd blend of styles and designs that just don't fit together.
If I want a classic looking Bianchi, I can find a nice one on eBay. If I want a nice modern steel bike, companies like Genesis make wonderful frames. Bianchi's passion is CF not steel.

Style aside, I think it's a pretty good idea to have a modern steel frame with modern components. It's just plain smart. I'm not saying steel is the only worthy frame material. I don't have to list all of its desirable attributes. I'm not a zealot, but it just so happens that all of my (too many) bikes are steel.

I just wrote all of my impressions on the topic from 37 years as a witness. I chose to delete it all because my deepest desire has only ever been to make bikes and I still get to do that. My only wish is that before we are all laid to rest, each of us gets to experience the full pallet of experiences that life has to offer. I have had a full share of all of it. I love with no reservation and no-one can hurt me bad enough to break my spirit.

There are many aspects to "modern" bikes, involving both improvements and change for change's sake. Aside from those, there is also conservatism for conservatism's sake, and prejudice against previously rejected developments that may have been rejected for bad reasons. Taken all together, a return to such things as internally geared hubs and leather saddles is not necessarily throwback, but may in fact reflect a sense that a 'new' technology did not live up to its promise. A leather saddle is not necessarily a throwback, though the current Brooks saddles (that replicate the pre-1954 round badge and skirt stamps) clearly are a throwback. There are more modern leather saddles, but they, too, seem modeled on very old designs.

Where conservatism is most obvious is wheel size and rider position. Bicycle designers of the 1880's developed the "safety bicycle" and picked a wheel size that has hardly changed since then. Rider position has hardly changed either. Smaller wheels have advantages --see Moulton-- but there is an inherent prejudice against them. I can't tell you how many times I've heard someone ask if the advantages of smaller wheels are enough to overcome the disadvantages. On investigation the disadvantages are mostly imaginary or aesthetic; but that doesn't matter. People want a modern bike, but not too modern.

If you want the fastest, most modern bike design, with no compromises, you'll get something like this:

http://www.wisil.recumbents.com/wisi...z/DSCF2821.JPG

If we're gonna do 'throwbacks" then why stop in the '40's

How about a Highwheeler

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=308078

or a saftey

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=308079

http://www.hiwheel.com/

Very well said, Frank, very well said. Words for a man to live by, and not just in our bicycles, but you have sumed up my life and my love of bicycles, too.

Bill

I'm more the Hight Tea type

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-5gxiI3TsiT...rollsroyce.jpg

Stanyan
 

Yes indeed.
Here's one that I built up on a modern lugged steel frame w/ design similar to the Brit club rider's bike I came up with.

Finding another International in good nick for the project was a remote possibility. This Soma w/ a modest suite of modern components, and bits & bobs from the parts box, meets my requirements. It's a nice clean design w/ 130 spacing, never crashed, no rust and no hyper$ "collector's object" price tag.

Nice, really nice! I wish they frame came in a 64cm :(
http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment...2&d=1364324501
Only one question..... will fenders and a bell fit?

Well, my butt is modeled on a very old design (probably caused by too much thowin back). I do like a nice leather saddle.

I would say their primary focus is on cf bikes, but to say that they are not passionate about steel bikes is simply not true. They have always made them, and clearly have no intentions of stopping.

Velognome,

Fenders will fit just fine w/28mm tires, a new set is sitting in a box since we're in a drought.
If it ever rains again I'll install them and ride in the slop.

Good idea on the bell.
I have a brass Crane model bell on my town bike, it's perfect to issue a Zen-like "Ding!" to remind one's self that riding a bike is not a Serious Activity.

Haha, bells are required by law in nyc, yet I rarely see one on a bike. Cops will write you a ticket if you get pulled over and don't have one though.

Bells and fenders were required equipment on a English Club machine...rain or shine.....kinda like icing on a krumpet..er cake :o