KonAaron Snake 

I'm not amazed at all - a lot of us value both and have both for different reasons. I like the early 90s because you get a lot of the style and advantages from the classics with more modern steels, OS tubes and more effective components.

Bruce Enns

I guess it all stemmed from the title of the thread, "One reason why I like vintage bikes..."

auchencrow

Good point.

Unless you're in that 1% with an ultra-lean and hyper-tuned physique to rival these uber-expensive CF "beauties", the functional difference between it and any decent C&V road bike is not going to be earth-shaking.

frantik

blasphemy!

JohnDThompson 

In my experience, stiff frames and light riders don't work well together. Any imperfections in the road surface make the bike hard to control.

DoninIN

Enh.. If the old bike fits you right, and you put a halfway decent, lightweight set of rims on it, how much faster is a a brand new carbon fiber monstrosity really going to be at the kinds of speeds, on the kinds of rides you and I are likely to do? Position on the bike has more to do with how areo you are than any other single thing (Or so I believe) and the biggest difference in terms of bang for the buck is in wheels, and you can put nice new sweet fast wheels on your vintage workhorse.

Bikedued

Good point on the mtb's! Having ridden a moderate trail on a 26 inch with front suspension, I know enough that I will probably never take a rigid mtb off road anytime soon. Mostly because I am 45 and have no insurance, but also because that kind of torture holds no pleasure for me anymore. With that said, I do own a few rigids, just because they're cool as hell. I can still ride them on a dirt road? I also own a 26 inch Haro Escape, with a Manitou SXR suspension fork. It's still enjoyable off road at least for me. I did recently buy a 29er as well. A 2013 Specialized Hard Rock Sport. In all honesty I have not been off road on it just yet. Planning on that tomorrow. I also added a Rock Shox Reba. Riding over obstacles on it feels like cheating after riding a 26 inch.,,,,BD

sloar 

My steel trek is a smoother ride than my full carbon pinarello. Just saying.

Bikedued

I almost bought a 2013 full carbon Roubaix instead of the Hard Rock. I wanted one pretty bad, until I rode one. I mean 12k weave with gloss clearcoat, and red/white graphics, Beautiful to look at!! I wasn't impressed at all. It felt stiff yes, but really no lively feeling like almost every decent steel bike I've ridden. It was very close to the feeling of the Cad 3 R600 I still own in the garage in Houston. That was the bike I installed a carbon post on, to see if the ride would improve. What it produced was the worst possible scenario. Saddle buzz.,,,,BD

shoota 

What is saddle buzz?

RobbieTunes

Outfitted the same, a modern used bike and an upgraded C&V often end up costing about the same. It's often when you compare an upgraded C&V bike to a new modern bike that there becomes a gap, but not much.

As far as performance, my $900 2008 used carbon/aluminum bike with 9-sp Ultegra handles my 18-mile workout route with ease, takes about 3-4 cogs. My $900 1988 used Columbus SLX bike with 9-sp DA handles the same route on 5-6 cogs. Otherwise, there is little difference in performance.

Now, in original kit, big difference. For example, a 1985 Cinelli Centurion Equipe with Columbus SL, 2x6 friction NR and a mix of components, was $1195 new, reduced to $800 until they sold them all. That money in 2005 would have gotten you a 7005 aluminum KHS Flite 700 with 9-sp 105 STI. I don't know if they were ever reduced to $800. Today, $1300 can get you an Eddy Merckx with SRAM Apex, full carbon, about half MSRP.

old's'cool

I'm sure that's true, but how much performance does one really need, short of actual competition? As practical transportation appliances, I think vintage bikes, back to the 70s at least, are strong contenders from a cost-effectiveness perspective, as compared to what can be purchased new.

brebla

Why I Like Vintage Bikes, Or What I Did On My Summer Vacation (a back to school essay due the first week of 9th grade)

By Brebla

This summer I went on bicycle tour of New York State. Two friends and I rode by the Finger Lakes, north to Watertown and back through the Adirondacks. We camped at state parks and had the freedom to make our own decisions about almost everything. I really like riding bikes.
The end.

Kinda like the guy who buys a ’67 Camaro for $100k at Barrett-Jackson because he dreamed about it then, but can afford it now. I can buy bikes from the 70’s and 80’s for a song and create something that resonates with me. I have CF bikes that outperform my steel bikes in just abut every way, and are affordable. But vintage bikes can be whatever you want, from bone stock to state of the art. You can rationalize value, style, collectability, investment, performance, safety, etc. Bottom line, it’s another way to really like riding bikes.

Now if you want to try something fun…

T-Mar

Well, I imagine that there are a significant number that own both. I do, but that is because I love bicycles, all bicycles, not just C&V. It amazes me how many people get wrapped up in one little niche of their hobby, without appreciating the big picture and whole history. For me, that's the most interesting part, knowing how and why things developed the way they did.

I see the tunnel vision mentality in lots of other hobbies. People get focused on a particular segment and summarily dismiss everything else. It's almost as if society deems you lower station because you have a broad knowledge base on a subject. They feel you have to specialize in an area to truly be knowledgeable. I kow several self-proclaimed film experts who won't even watch anything that is in black and white. Don't even bother to mention silent films to them because they look at you like you're crazy. For me, these are the people who are not knowledgeable. They're missing out on some truly great films. Specializing is fine but you need an appreciation of the whole field to put things into proper context.

Given the way a lost of people drive, dual-pivot and V-brakes are a big advantge in eveyday use for accident avoidance, while brifters allow you to always have your hands at the controls for immediate action. IMO, even if they only save you from one accident, they're worth the extra expense. I never use my C&V bicycles for errand running commuting, etc. They're pretty much relegated to rural roads, with little traffic.

C&V bicycles are cost-effective, provided you can do your own maintenance. However, a lot of people are not mechanically inclined, For them, a new bicycle with maintenance free sealed cartridge bearings can be just as cost effective, over the long run. If you factor in the cost of tools, supplies and your time, the extra maintrenance required on C&V bicycles substantially adds to the base price. Most memebers probably average over $100 just reconditioning a C&V purchase for the road and would have at least half that amount in yearly maintenance.

gomango

"Now if you want to try something fun..."

Nice Surly. Good looking dog.

Pugsley?

I rode my friend's Krampus yesterday for a bit and loved it.

3" tires are the ticket for the slime we were going through.

I had my Fargo with 2.25s and they weren't wide enough down in the muck and sand.

I need to work on technique.

gomango

I would rate the Colnago as super stiff in the stays and bb.

I have a long ways to go before I need to worry about being too light.

My September goal is 175 pounds before cross season.

old's'cool

I agree, C&V bikes do not necessarily have a cost advantage as transportation applicances for those having to pay an LBS to overhaul bearings. My question to you is (since I don't know), what price point are you looking at for a 2013 derailleur road bike with good quality sealed bearing hubs, pedals, BB, & headset?
I'm not sure if you're also implying there are areas of maintenance besides bearings, that a non-exotic C&V bike is more demanding than a modern bike. Nothing obvious to me in that regard.

It's a given that good modern brakes provide greater caliper force for a given lever force than most older brakes. Assuming the same pad material, the available stopping force is the same; it's just a matter of applying the desired force at the lever. My vintage bikes are all able to provide all the stopping power I need, at any rate. In heavy traffic, I keep my hands on the hoods for the most part, like you say, for immediate action. For exclusively urban riding, you're right, brifters would be a good choice. Fortunately for me, urban riding is the exception rather than the rule.

dddd

I generally find that a centerpull setup gives more than enough stopping power for traffic emergencies, sometimes too much unless I'm getting the slight moderating effect from using the safety levers. This does require that the system is in good, overall condition and in some cases that a bit of metal be trimmed (filed) from the lever bodies to allow full lever travel, part of which is usually lost to the installation of the safety levers. But some of the Dia-Compe and Weinmann levers with factory safety levers have pre-relieved lever bodies or safety levers that are pegged into the side of the main lever, with no mod's needed.

A lot of us, perhaps the great majority, got into C&V gradually, due to the prohibitive cost of buying new equipment, and after enough years, the sweat equity of acquiring the tools and skill is paid for.
It can indeed be less than cost-effective for the uninitiated to buy a restored older bike (or have one restored) rather than a new one, but at least many of us here are doing our best to supply lower-cost, ready-to-ride bikes for the newer riders who like the look and feel of old bikes or who seek an alternative to rampant consumerism, waste, and etc.

As for brifters, they create as many problems as they solve, while introducing the habit of riding almost continuously on the hoods, and the compromises in bike fit, once applied, encourages this even more.
I set up my C&V's with bigger frames, and use the hoods as a grip only when sprinting or climbing while standing up, so the levers needn't look like a whole 'nuther handlebar extension to be comfortable and the other two hand positions are better optimized for their specific roles.
I still ride and enjoy modern bikes(!), but it's not like they are best in all ways, even ignoring their higher cost.

iab

In terms of an initial investment, there is no doubt C&V has a cost advantage. On the upper end, it takes no effort to spend 5 figures on a new bike. Very few, maybe a handful of brands, can command the same in C&V. The low end is the same. A non-department store road is $700-800. A low end CL bike is half that. But I suppose you could make that case for any used bike on CL.

But then there is also no doubt a C&V bike needs more maintenance. I commuted with one for a year before I gave up. Something always needed futzing. The modern commuter gets a once over in the winter and usually a good cleaning is enough. I had to readjust the BB at 3 years. I think about the same for trimming the derailleurs and other than changing pads, I haven't touched the brakes.

But since the capital costs are low, you can have a few C&V bike in rotation, keeping the maintenance away.

And that is why I like C&V in addition to my modern bikes. It is a different (neither better nor worse) riding experience. I like a new experience.

Cougrrcj

I NEVER ride my bikes on the hoods, so the brifter controls - if I my bike had them - would NOT be at my fingertips! Half of the time, I ride at the outer ends of the upper part of the bars where they start to curve forward, the other half on the drops.

Yes, my Fuji came with safety levers - and I'd put them back on if I do any touring, just to have the brakes accessible while riding upright like I do when riding for comfort.

Chrome Molly

I think the big advances between C&V and modern bikes are (in order of greatest performance benefit to least) are:

- Modern wheels with cartridge bearings, light weight, aero profile (lumping this all together since you can get one wheelset with all these features)
- Index shifting (even DT style, it was just such a big advance) - brifters were the next step, but not so much so as to have their own category
- Tires that don't puncture as often and are a consistent weight all the way round (gatorskins, etc) - to me the time to fix a puncture outweighs uber light weight
- Brakes have improved a lot (mostly dual pivots, but some side pulls also with better pads)
- More gears on cassettes (it does mater going from 5 to 9 cogs) - half stepping works well but on all but tours I find it cumbersome
- Stiffer cranksets (from the myriad of new BB styles, IMO they can take a noodly old frame and make it significantly more responsive - YMMV)
- everything else - to me everything else is last

I'd much rather have everything on the top part of the list than a CF frame/fork. I split the difference with C&V and modern and updated a trek 760 with many modern parts from the top of the list, and I'm quite happy. It was simply more cost effective, and I built it with exactly the gearing and whatever else I wanted, not something off a showroom floor with 53/11 gearing I'd never ever use. Thanks to our friends across the pond, I'm certain my total was about a third of a new bike with the same features (if such a bike existed outside a custom shop). I think the real issue is one of sales. We went from steel, to al, to ti, to cf and haven't yet created the latest thing that we're all lusting after. When we do, the stuff on the top of the list will still be more important.

So as to why I like C&V, you can ride them in their original state with a smile of your face, or update them for pennies on the dollar and ride them with a smile on your face.

Turbo231

I like C&V bikes because they are cool, cheap, and it takes a certain ability to have one. I can turn my own wrench so my actual costs are close to zero, as I had a backyard full of bikes that is now 2 bins of bike parts. They are cheap and the reality of it is I bike for exercise I usually wouldn't get. Efficiency is moot as I never max myself out zipping around town, so the harder to move around, to some extent, the better exercise. My bikes stay in tune when I need them to and get me from point A to B in style. Safety is not hard, with soft rubber brake shoes, even chrome rims stop well.

Its like people who buy new cars vs. used cars. I don't think I'll ever have a new car. Its not because I can't afford it, its because I have a hard time in my mind justifying spending that sort of money in my mind for just "new" when a higher end used can do the exact same thing. The same however does not apply to toilet paper.

rc211

The quality is better but the other reason I like a vintage bike is that it is not optimal. Rims and tires I get modern, but still period correct look without the mass.

I like having an excuse why I didn't do 500km today up a 12% grade at a 150 cadence. I like exercise but also like stopping to have a beer/coffee and read a book in the middle of my 50km.

I am non-aero for life.

Bruce Enns

[QUOTE=T-Mar;15722083]Well, I imagine that there are a significant number that own both. I do, but that is because I love bicycles, all bicycles, not just C&V. It amazes me how many people get wrapped up in one little niche of their hobby, without appreciating the big picture and whole history. For me, that's the most interesting part, knowing how and why things developed the way they did.

I see the tunnel vision mentality in lots of other hobbies. People get focused on a particular segment and summarily dismiss everything else. It's almost as if society deems you lower station because you have a broad knowledge base on a subject. They feel you have to specialize in an area to truly be knowledgeable. I kow several self-proclaimed film experts who won't even watch anything that is in black and white. Don't even bother to mention silent films to them because they look at you like you're crazy. For me, these are the people who are not knowledgeable. They're missing out on some truly great films. Specializing is fine but you need an appreciation of the whole field to put things into proper context.



For me, its knowing what I like and what I don't like, and being competent in the things that interest me. New bikes have many fine features, but as a whole my interest is diminished.

Tunnel vision, ignorance, call it what you like.

A co-worker (mechanical engineer) of mine often says "Ignorance is bliss, and I'm the happiest man in 3 counties". I'm a very happy man too!

Its time to go for a bike ride,

Cheers,

puckett129

This is why I've settled for using old frames as the base on which to hang new parts. It's the sweet spot for me aesthetically and in terms of performance. I do have a carbon bike, but it doesn't get used too much.