BradH

1. Economics. For the price of one new bike I can ride a half dozen older bikes, each with it's own personality and purpose.

2. Working with my hands. I am a mechanical person. I enjoy taking a neglected road bike totally apart, cleaning in thoroughly, and putting it back together with fresh bearings, cables, chain, bar tape and possibly an upgraded 8/9/10 speed drivetrain & a set of wheels I built. Buying a new carbon bike and taking it to a someone to get it worked on sounds like about as much fun as shooting myself in the eye with a carbine action 200 shot range model Red Ryder.

3. Aesthetics. Threaded headsets, quill stems, DT shifters, top tube parallel with the ground, wheels without a NASCAR sized decal on them. I find the appearance of older bikes more appealing.

4. Charity rides. Most of the time I am the only person on a bike with DT shifters lost in a sea of carbon and aluminum bikes. I'm one of those people who does not want to be just like everyone else, so I'm not. It's not a race but despite any perceived disadvantage I have, I typically finish in front of those who ask me about my "old bike".

5. Performance. As long as the older steel frame is of mid range or better quality and the bike is in a good state of repair, for me, there is little or no benefit to a newer bike, especially with upgraded (lighter) wheels and drivetrain.

Jarrett2

This is an interesting point and something I haven't considered. My bikes stay in my garage when I'm not riding them. I wouldn't ride my carbon bike into downtown Dallas and lock it up. I might look at a less expensive bike for that purpose. I guess it's sort of tools for the job.

I just notice on a lot of the group rides, there is a pace. And depending on what level rider you are, you may or may not need a certain level of bike to sustain that pace. That's one of the things that drove me to get a "faster" bike.

oddjob2

1. Nostalgia.
2. Appreciation for US made frames such as Trek, Schwinn (not all), and Cannondale (aluminum)
3. Hand built craftsmanship in many cases.
4. Racing heritage of certain marques; Peugeot, Eddy Merckx, Colnago, De Rosa, Bianchi, etc.
5. We're not racing.
6. Roads are old and crappy, at least in the northeast and midwest. Steel ride quality is hard to improve upon, whether aluminum or CF.
7. Classic bling: diamond frame design, chrome, polished vs anodized aluminum, lugs, metallic automotive grade paint.
8. Wild paint jobs vs. Nascar style decals on today's CF.
9. Cost and value considerations.
10. Collectability / hobby fun.

In my case, it's fun to be able to go into the garage and figure out which of some two dozen bikes I want to take for a spin. Most are mid 1980's Trek and Schwinn road bikes, but I also have vintage team racers, hybrids, and mtbs. There are a few modern bikes too, but the only carbon is a TREK 2200, which I haven't ridden yet.

Also, if you buy and sell the occasional vintage bike, there is no bigger thrill than selling a bike that is almost twice as old as the buyer! It's happened a few times and the buyer gets a huge kick out of it too.

Many of today's fine non-competition bikes are still made of steel, Rivendell, Trek 520, come to mind not to mention the plethora of artisan builders.

MRT2

To a certain extent, a light cf road bike will be lighter and more responsive than will a vintage steel bike. That said, putting someone like me on a CF racing bike won't turn me into Alberto Contador.

Chitown_Mike

I started out on a stove-pipe Continent road bike and LOVED the way it rode. Until I backed it up into a tree when on the back of my car.....le sigh

But now I have 2 brand new bikes, a 2014 Trek 1.5 and 2013 Trek 3500. However I did ride around on an 88 Trek 800 that I converted into a drop bar all arounder and also loved that too.

I'd love a vintage Columbus tubing frame that I can do a complete build off of one day and turn it into a gravel grinder to do some touring on, possibly run all new technology shifting and such. An old steel frame has a "way" to it that I love how it feels when rolling.

cyccommute 

A couple of decades earlier than the 1980s. Not a couple of decades before today.

cyccommute 

Heretic! You should be burned at the...um...seatpost for mentioning aluminum in the same breath as vintage rust...sorry...iron. The irony is that the seatpost would be aluminum

I don't disagree with you on some of your reasons but I find this one to be the most ironic. People have said all over this thread that they don't want to race and yet I suspect that the bikes they most covet are the classic race bikes. Those were good bikes and when I see one at my local co-op, I know what they are and can appreciate them. But, for me, they are still kind of 'meh'. I have a 2009 Cannondale Synapse that I picked up from the same co-op that's a better bike than anything of the exotic steel bikes I've seen there. It's a far, far, far better ride then most of the plain jane steel bikes I see every week. Ride- and weight-wise, it's on a par with my Dean.

oddjob2

Porsche, BMW, Mini, and Jaguar. All have built and sponsor race cars, which helps make their everyday cars entertaining to drive. I own three of the four, no Porsche currently, with no aspirations to race, but they are classic designs, sporty, and fun nonetheless.

adrien

Hmm. It is possible you're referring to steel vs. Alloy / Carbon, or geometry, or both. Not sure.

I am a fan of steel bikes. I ride them because they are custom built, fit me well and behave exactly as I wish them to (mostly because of a great builder and good communication). They probably look old-fashioned; both are lugged and one of them has brushed stainless lugs. But they are equipped with the latest drivetrains, brakes, hubs and the like, because those bits I appreciate as being substantially better than 20 years ago; but I just don't see that so much with frame material. And my steel bikes are 2-3 pounds heavier than a carbon equivalent. Not bad, and not enough to make a difference.

Mostly, though, I ride them because they are unique, and not production bikes. I dislike the notion of model years for production bikes, and the sense that the latest bike is only the latest for 9 months or so. I rented a Dogma super-bike recently, and it had Campy EPS and a price tag akin to a good 2-year old Honda. It was, oh, maybe 3-5% faster, stiffer, and more efficient. It was also (gasp) last year's model, and didn't ride very well on anything that wasn't smooth. Glad to have rented it, not worth more to me than both my custom bikes plus my mountain bike and my kid's Spesh road bike.

I went on a group ride the other day and counted. 16 production carbon bikes, 7 production alloy, 4 production Ti, 2 custom carbon bikes, 4 custom steel bikes and one custom Ti bike. We all had a good time. Average pace on the flats was 22-24. And not an inexpensive bike in the lot. Different folks like different things, and that's okay.

InOmaha

Tools in a box. Each with a purpose.

That's why I own 3; Aluminum MTB and Road Bike, and Lugged Steel bike. The old lugged steel is the in between. Cheap to the point it was free, more efficient than the MTB and a more relaxed ride than the road bike. I "upgraded" it with some newer old parts and a couple hours of time, so it shifts and brakes better, but it's still one that wouldn't be a big loss if it disappeared. Much better than a BSO at less than half the price.

cyccommute 

The difference is that all of those car manufacturers...and many more...build and sponsor race cars that the ordinary person can't get their hands on...ever. Bicycles don't fall into that same category. The bike that they use for elite level racing is available to the masses, usually in the same model year. There are a few exceptions and, I suspect, that bicycle racing may be going the way of auto racing but for a very long time, you could buy the same bike as any pro threw his leg over.

I get the nostalgia thing, really I do. But bicycling fits the quote in your signature quite well. To paraphrase "...you must keep moving [forward]". I've owned and (mostly) enjoyed 35 bikes over the last 35+ years with a couple of exceptions. I've broken some, upgraded from some, made changes to some of them, etc. Each one was a pretty good bike when I bought it and was still a good bike when I got rid of it. But I can't honestly say that there has ever been a bike that I would want to go back to. The Miyata 610 that I toured on and rode as my main road bike for 20 years was good as a touring bike but the Cannondale T800 I replace it with was a much better touring bike. It wasn't until I had switched to the Cannondale that I realized how noodly the 610 was. The Cannondale is stiffer, carries a load better, climbs better and descends better than the 610 could ever do.

The steel Specialized Rockhopper I pounded into the ground was also a good bike. But it wasn't nearly the bike that the Stumpjumper Pro I replaced it with was. I see similar Rockhoppers all the time at the co-op but I would never think of picking one up. They just aren't interesting.

I've also reached a point in my life where I don't have to ride old bikes. I agree with adrien but from a different perspective. I, too, like bikes that are unique and not necessarily production bikes but steel is the easy way out and, frankly, not all that unique. I do see the frame material as being substantially better than it was 20 (actually more like 30) years ago. I have no steel in my current batch of bikes. Not only because I'm not a fan of steel but because steel frames are rather ordinary. Even custom ones look pretty much alike because they use the same techniques that have been used for 100 years. Give me an aluminum bike where the tubes have been engineered for the purpose any day. I don't own carbon but I'm not nearly as adverse to it as I once was.

squirtdad

I am sure it varies wildly for me it is:

Aesthetics. I love the look of a classic diamond framed bikes. I hate the look of threadless stems.

fun to work on: I like working on my own bikes, I can do pretty much all the work on my classic bikes

Upgradable Classic steel frame bikes give a lot of flexibility for upgrades.....or palette for expression. my road bike has 9 speed sti so no need to stand still

Flexible: Quill stems offer a lot of options in terms of height.....once you cut your threadless stem you are done. Steel has allowed me to cold set a frame to handle 135 hubs and to use 130 in a 126 frame

Use and resuse: These bikes work great, there is no reason to replace (N+1 is ok) (I like to claim economics, but upgrading is not always cheap)

ride: I like the ride of steel

steel is real: Nothing wrong with carbon or aluminum per se, but I am riding 30 year old steel bikes with no problems and expect to be 30 years from now. I don't have the same comfort level with aluminum (had on bike with cracked head tube) and carbon


and for fun....I have added pics as there are not enough pics in C&A imho

84 torpado super strada..... even though it is not a "high end" bike it is fun to ride....there is something about italians.



83 nishhiki commuter utility




89 miyata 1400

cyccommute 

This is the one point that really irks me about steel lovers. I have no more confidence in steel than I do in aluminum based on my experience. I've broken two steel frames and two aluminum frames...all mountain bikes. One of the aluminum frames broke at the seat mast because of my stupidity of using a Hellbent 1.5" setback post. It was repaired and continued to be used for many years. The other aluminum frame that broke was a Specialized M2 metal matrix frame which almost all had problems due to the material.

Then there are the steel frames. I owned a Specialized Rock Combo that broke at the dropout. The frame went ping (yes, steel does fail catastrophically) and was broken. The other steel frame was a nightmare that involved multiple failures that the manufacturer wouldn't cover because "you rode the bike". It was a first generation Miyata Ridge Runner which came out one to two years after Specialized started mass producing mountain bikes. The fork broke at the steer tube/crown junction. Miyata suggested that all forks on all Ridge Runners be replaced due to a manufacturing problem but they wouldn't replace them under warranty.

Then the frame cracked at the weld on the bottom bracket bridge on both sides. That's when I learned about the myth of easily mending a steel frame in the field. The welder was surprised at how thin the metal was and how easy it would be to burn through the metal rather than repair it. After the repair, the frame cracked on the other side of the brake bridge. The final break was when the dropout broke finally rendering the frame too much trouble to repair.

Although I probably won't do it, I could be riding my aluminum bikes for 30 years as well. My Cannondale T800 is 11 years old and has done several thousand miles of loaded touring and, I expect, will do thousands more. My 9 year Salsa Las Cruces has done more mileage than any bike I have ever owned (over 14,000) and I expect it to keep rolling for a very long time after I'm done with it. The Ridge Runner did slightly than 3000 miles before I gave up on it and the Rock Combo did 3800 miles. The M2 bike did nearly 7000 hard mountain bike miles before it broke. Based on those numbers alone, I'd trust aluminum over steel

Pakiwi

I ride both a 1984 Steel framed bike and a Carbon framed bike.
The 1984 9 speed is a Cello Europa, made in the Colnago factory and when I got it, it came with Shimano 600 7 speed. I got it for a great price and used it to prepare for 3 centuries in 3 days.
It was comfortable and has always been reliable. After our first child came, the bike got put away and the weight went on.
After three kids and after my father passed away, I decided to get back on the bike. I got a Carbon Frame Jamis Extreme Pro and got serious about losing the weight and getting fit.
Both bikes are a little different. The Steel frame is only a few pounds heavier and is comfortable and just as fast as the Carbon frame.
The big difference between the two bikes is the vibration dampening in the Carbon frame. It doesn't seem to transmit the buzz of the road like the steel does. I know if I changed tyres, it would make a difference.
Riding both over the same rides, times are pretty much exactly the same. I would ride either bikes on a long ride. I feel switching to Hollowtech bottom bracket from square taper, made more of a difference in the bikes than the frame material.
I did try Aluminium, but I didn't like the original frame, though that was 15 years ago and I hear Aluminium is much better now.
Its not about the bike.

Allan

FrenchFit 

I doubt you speak for everyone. I own both carbon fiber and vintage bikes, I've got no dog in this fight, but I can't help but chuckling at all the 40/50/60 somethings in full kits, clipless, electric shifting, powertap, computers, carbon wheels on $3-8K wunder-bikes. I'll leave it at that, but leaving the coffee shop I'd rather ride on with Grant. My simple critique is the car culture mindset of the last century has found a new home, and it's in the upscale bike industry and it's gadgets.

Bandera

So you have met Captain Fast.
He was droning on and on and on at a cocktail party (yes, elderly folk still do cocktail parties) last weekend to a lovely divorce' about his Pinnalized/Specarello nano-technology uber bike with it's hydraulic shifting and electric brakes. She slipped off into the loo to seek refuge rather than stab him with a cocktail fork to shut him up, very good manners.

-Bandera

cyccommute 

What are 40/50/60 somethings supposed to wear and ride? Personally, I can't help but shake my head at all the "I'm not going to wear lycra so I'll wear holes in my skin with jeans" crowd. They may be riding old bikes and wearing hair shirts but that doesn't make them better...or holier...than someone who is dressed in functional bicycle clothing and riding a new bike.

Additionally, bicycle manufacturers are kind of stupid in that they are trying to appeal to the 20 and 30 somethings that have no money and ignoring the people who have the cash...the 40/50/60 somethings. 20/30 somethings may have the muscles for riding today's fad of more gears for a narrower range but they just don't have the money for it.

My problem with Petersen and his acolytes is exactly the attitude that you show. I have the same problem with the racer wannabees who judge people based on their appearance. You, Petersen, and the racer wannabees have no right to criticize other's choices. When we want your opinion, we'll ask for it.

I volunteer at a co-op every Saturday. I see bikes from barely functional Helmart BSOs to the latest uberbike and everything imaginable in between. I see riders rocking the almost homeless chic without 2 nickels to rub together to "full kit" riders. With each and everyone of them, I treat their bikes and their person with respect and I don't judge the nearly homeless any differently than I judge the "full kit" riders. They are all riding a bike for reasons that they alone need to justify and they don't need me, you, Grant Petersen, racer wannabes, or anyone else judging them because of how them ride or what they ride. If any person at the co-op ask how to make their ride better, I'll offer my opinion but, even then, I do so with respect and with an eye to what they can and cannot afford.

squirtdad

A bit OT from the OP original question, but:

I am 50 something kinda guy and the bike i use and what i wear are a choice based on what I am doing.....it is not a one or the other

If I am doing a quick errand on the weekend , I will hop on my torpado or nishki in what I am wearing (most often shorts and a t shirt or polo shirt)

If I am commuting to work...non bike specific shorts, t shirt, bike gloves and spd touring shoes if it is the nishiki or running shoes if it is the torpado. (Note i only have a 5 mile one way commute.....it it were longer then I would wear bikes shorts and jersey)

If I am riding fast (at least in my mind) I am in bike shorts, jersey (usually one promoting my company as the were cheap), spd-sl bike shoes and I am on my Miyata.

bike specific clothes are very functional and make long rides way more enjoyable.

So I don't get why any one would question " 40/50/60 somethings in full kits, clipless, electric shifting, powertap, computers, carbon wheels on $3-8K wunder-bikes." any more than some one would question some one riding and english 3sp or a Home Hilsen with friction shifters. Different people, different likes and bikes.

and my vision for a custom is: Dave Kirk lugged frame, classic threaded stem, internal brake cable and ultegra di2...... classic look with really clean lines and minimal cables. so I am not quite sure where that would fit.....old and new I guess, but it would be a full kit kind of ride

Wulf

I bought my last bike in 1985. All Campy SR. A move and family and a good dose of laziness kept me off of it until last year. Now its classic chic and I dont know any better.

FrenchFit 

Well, I think the OP was specifically asking for opinions - perhaps you are saying that only yours matters. More seriously, I tend to agree with you that negative attitudes about poser-racers are as unattractive as attitudes about Freds; it's a big tent, room for everyone to do there own thing. I may chuckle at my neighbor dressing up like Teejay to KoM his Wilier Gran Turismo up the MUP, but he's welcome to have a laugh at my USS SuperFred as I roll it out for trip to the farmer's market sporting my boxing shorts and tennis shoes. But the real resentment comes with the displacement of our LBSs with chains selling expensive, disposable bikes and an inventory of accessories & gadgets that's 90% made in China. Say what you will about Grant, who's a local, but he's not following the Walmart, Pontiac, Fry's business model. If the OP should drop bye Rivendell he'll may get an earful about the "latest technology".

Doohickie

I think there's a more.... organic? natural? feel to a nice steel frame compared with carbon fiber or even aluminum. I'm sure I could be faster on a lighter bike but I weigh north of 200 lb. and I don't want some elegant CF frame to disintegrate under me.

When it comes to components, I see no need for a 13 speed cassette in the rear (or whatever the kids are flaunting these days). 6 or 7 speed cassettes (or even *gasp* freewheels) serve me just fine. Older stuff tends to be more durable because the weights aren't driven down to their absolute minimum. And when you have fewer gears, the chain doesn't have to be shaved down to nothing. You can optimize for weight & performance, or you can optimize for durability. I prefer durability.

Even with that, I run at or near the front of the groups I ride with (which aren't particularly competitive but I care more about fun that competitiveness) with my high tensile steel frame bikes.

linnefaulk

I am riding a 1990 Trek because it is what I have. If I could afford a new bike…

cyccommute 

Jarret2 asked about why people ride older bikes instead of new ones. He didn't ask about whether old people should ride the latest technology or whether people who may not look the best in lycra should wear it. I don't care what you wear nor what you ride nor am I going to say anything about either. I may think comments about your choices but that's where it ends. I don't object to you or your choices but I do object to your dismissive and judgmental attitude...especially in a forum that is dedicated to people who are dismissed and judged on a regular basis.

modelmartin

Older bikes are cheaper and easier to work on. Parts are way cheaper. I don't know nothing about no ride feel between aluminonium and steeeel and crabon fibray. I love my aluminum and steel Raleigh and my steel Raleigh and my stainless steel, steel, and aluminum Kabuki Submariner and I even loved the carbon Trek Domane I rented last year.

At least for me I think it is fun and a slight ego boost when I keep up with or pass riders with newer, shinier bikes. I know it isn't the bike but it is fun never the less.

I do like the look of older style lugged frames. I also like some of the carbon frames. I would love to have a Carrera Phibra!!!!

chasm54

Well, like you I own both carbon fibre and vintage bikes. I'll be 60 years old in a few weeks time. I ride in full kit, clipless, with a computer when I'm training, and sometimes on carbon wheels. I plead not guilty to electronic shifting, but I've thought about it, and my race bike would cost in excess of $3k at today's prices. Last season I was racing, and competitive in non age-related Cat3/4 fields. I haven't been racing this year because of injury, but next year I may be back. Chuckling? You're welcome.