I just realized, my newest bike, a Giant Cypress DX, that I bought new, off the LBS showroom floor ... is 14 years old. So, it must be obsolete. Even with under 2,000 miles on it, it needs a complete rebuild and upgraded, to be "useable". I was going to do a couple upgrades/modifications to make it suitable for on/off road touring, anyway, but now that everything but the tire size is obsolete ... is it worth it?

Last year I upgraded to a newer bike (a 2011 Trek 7.3 FX) from my 2003 Giant Sedona DX (bought late in the 2012 season), and honestly, after switching shifters on my Sedona to Rapid Fire, I think they pretty much ride the same.

Over the years, I did swap the suspension fork to a suspension corrected rigid fork, and that was a massive improvement, but otherwise, the stock bike is wonderful.

Does your Cypress have an 8 speed cassette? If so, and unless you really have a strong desire to get a new bike, upgrade the shifters, service the faithful steed and ride on! If it is 7 speed cassette, you are probably good too, but I would swap wheels if you have a freewheel before touring.

I like staying with 8 speed gearing, as the components tend to be less expensive, and arguably more durable.

You could get marginally better bikes and components by getting a new(er) bike, but you may not get your money's worth. If you are really curious, go test ride a couple, and see for yourself whether the new bikes are worth it to you.

Apart from maybe the front shock, replacement parts for anything on that bike are easy to find. You should be more depressed that you hardly rode the bike during that 14 years.

'it needs a complete rebuild and upgraded, to be "useable"'

What does that mean, exactly?

I'd say that after 14 years you deserve a new bike, and if that's the issue then go for it! But it's hard to image that the parts are worn out after only 2,000 miles, unless it was stored exposed to the elements. It must be more to it than that?

Hardly obsolete. Your Giant has 7 speed shifters, while a current model has 8 or 9 speed. The main difference is in top end speed, so for example, top end on current 8 speed is 48 - 12, whereas on your bike, the top gear is 48 - 13. This isn't to say current bikes aren't better, but to get better performance, you really need to spend $800 or more.

For the first ... I don't know how many years ... she kept getting flats in under 5 miles, no nails/thorns, glass ... sometimes the flats would come just sitting. Nothing in the tires and no protruding spokes. Eventually, I discovered the problem: both tires had a tiny pin holes in the sidewall, tube entered, tube blew. No more Kenda tires for me.
I do feel bad about not being able to ride it much, but, being bicycle poor, I only had 8 or 9 others I could ride.

If it worked when you bought it and it has less than 2,000 miles on it, why does it need a complete rebuild and upgrade to be "useable"? I've owned several bikes that were a lot older than yours that I rode stone stock after basic maintenance and taking care of minor issues like cables, brake pads and tires. I had a 1995 Trek 1500 that I rode up until two years ago. The only change/upgrade it ever got outside of the usual consumables was a more modern set of rims. My wife rides a 1993 Trek 820 that is stock except for some comfort items like a different saddle and handlebars. I cleaned up a 1980s Schwinn Traveler for my stepson to use when riding with the grandkids. It too is completely stock except for consumables and comfort items.

Your bike should still be in pretty good shape with less than 2,000 miles on it, so outside of some of the normal consumables (all of which are still available) there is no "need" to throw big money at a complete rebuild and upgrade if all you want is a "usable" bike.

8 speed, Grip **** shifters (rubber rotted away, going to upgrade to trigger or brifters if I convert to drop bars. Can't find good, affordable 8 speed barend shifters.

48/13 with 700x40C tires is right around 102". That gear shouldn't hold anyone on a hybrid back. (If it did, they'd be investigating road bikes.)

I wanted a "modern" not "obsolete" bike when I bought it. Bike clubs used to laugh at me (until I passed them) when I was riding my 1989 KHS Montana Summit - decked out in the then factory racing colors of blue top tube, down tube, and rear triangle, with hot pink fork, head tube, and seat tube. I admit to updating it a little ... I replaced the 28/38/48 Bio-Pace crank to a 22/32/42, upgraded from 6 to 7 speed, put on a SRAM X9 RD, SRAM X3(?) trigger shifters, SACHS 5000 brakes with Suntour levers, and pretty much eliminated everything that said ((((shudder)))) "Shimano" on it, and added a rear rack. I don't know what upset the bike clubs more ... that a 50's something rider on a pink and blue mountain bike passed them ... or if it was the fact I was pulling a trailer at the time

Did it look like this?



If so, I would totally rock that on group rides. There's something very satisfying about keeping up with the group on an "obsolete" sleeper bike. Most of my bikes are from around 1990, for reference.

That's a question that only you can answer.

If you were buying yourself a new fun-car, would you rather have a brand new Corvette or a resto-modded muscle car for about the same money?

If you picked the Corvette, buy yourself a new bike. Every single part will be brand new and it will also come with a new bike warranty.
If you picked the resto-mod, start shopping for components and taking your old bike apart. Might as well go for a new powder coat job on the frame while you're at it.

It's your bike. The only way you can screw up the decision is by doing what somebody else tells you they would have done.

I'm still using the Bike I built up first in 1975.. parts that wear can be replaced without succumbing to the Sellers Marketing Admonishments you have a useless pile of junk

but if you do, You can donate your bike to a Charity to Ship it to Sub Saharan Africa where someone will, Doubtless, treasure It.

Mine is a darker blue and "Raspberry" (hot pink/lipstick pink) I like lugged steel frames.

Just be aware that nearly all drop bars have a larger diameter than mountain bikes. Mounting them will be a beast. I think WTB used to put out a drop bar called the Dirtdrop that would solve that problem. If so, your brifters will need some shimming to fit, and they might not pull enough cable to operate the brakes.

IMO, older bikes are heavier, require more maintenance and will probably last longer. people may or may not find it significant. that's about it.

With my experience, with bikes up to 40 years old or more... They may be heavier, but in my experience don't require any more maintenance than modern bikes. I have replaced derailleurs long before they needed it, but for a good solid functional bike. The old 10 speeds (when 10 speed meant 2x5) are many times still rolling with the only maintenance done over the years being cables, chains, tires and bar wrap.

And when components need to be changed, there is always the option of upgrading to more modern and/or lighter components.

Admittedly, most 40 year old bikes that are worth riding have either been meticulously maintained, or have been sitting in garages for 39+ years...

any reason to go n+1 is a good reason