One major difference is, value for the dollar spent. I won't deny that a $5000 new bike is better performing than anything you can buy that's 30 years old - but even then, that margin of superiority is not as great as you might choose to believe, compared to a classic steel racing or touring bike that's currently worth $1000 or so. But let's say your budget is $500 or so, or less. In terms of raw performance, you can get A LOT more performance with a well chosen older bike than you can with a new one. The new bike will have more convenient shifters for sure, but it won't have more reliable, more durable components. And the frame on a new $500 bike will not be better than the frame on a 20 year old bike that costs $500 today.

And that's $500. You can get a perfectly useable older road bike, or older mountain bike, for well under $200. Anything that costs $200 new, is either going to be heavy as a tank, or simply junk.

It's not any different than with cars. If my budget is $100K, I'd buy a new one. If it's $10K, I most assuredly would buy something used. At $25-50K, there's arguments to be made both ways.

You buy the best NEW bike you can find for $400, and I'll buy the best OLD bike I can find for $400. My old bike will clean the clock of your new one - so long as the rider knows how to strap into the pedals and shift the gears on the old one.

Lots of folks seem to be missing the OP, spending too much time on why they do not like new. Luckily, some folks have helped me understand why they like vintage. I can see myself buying a vintage bike for some of my riding, but I love my new MTB for the trails and my new road bike for a fast 20-30 miles.

Here's another: Raced new "back when" and converted to Fixed Gear > 22 years ago where it has been in continuous service.

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=424761

Although FG riding has seen somewhat of a resurgence in recent years no "modern" machine exceeds its' performance on the road.
Once again: What works, works.
Some of us prefer 19th century technology for whatever reason, a favorite for me.

Cycling is about Pedaling a bicycle, get a properly equipped fixed gear road bike to understand the fundamentals of the sport.
No modern tech required, just a commitment to technique and saddle time.

-Bandera

Caveat.. I have not ridden a 'modern bike', or at least what might be considered a 'quality' modern bike.

Aesthetics plus.. Spend £20 on a 'low' quality lugged steel frame from the '80's then spend another £100 and a bit of love and care putting it back together again, a mix of the old parts where recoverable and new when not or new when needed and you end up with a 'new' 30 year old bike for £120, ignoring tools and labour. In another 30 years it will be a 'new' 60 year old bike. Take it out for its first test ride and it will put put a big smile on your face.... and continue to do so.

I could blather some more but I guess, for me, that is it.

Why old bikes? For me it's mostly the cost. I can have several nice old bikes for the cost of one new bike. I do have modern bikes too. For hard mountain biking I love my 2010 Cannondale with its disc brakes. But even so my 1994 Killer V can still rip even without front suspension. I like to ride them both! I would like a modern road bike but everything I've ridden really isn't enough better to justify the cost. My "fast carbon bike" is a 1990, nearly 25 years old. Modern stuff I ride is better but is it $2000 better? I'm not sure. Some are beautiful and that may just get me to buy one yet.

Awesome!

I have a Langston on the way that will be my single speed, and someday a vintage bike for me.

I have a 20-year old, 20-pound Colnago Tecnos with a mix of Campy Record/Chorus/Athena components that I bought in 2002 for $800. Folks with the money for high-end bikes were switching to carbon and dumping their steel bikes. The gadget-geek boy in me is really attracted to new stuff and I think about getting a new bike all the time. The thing is, though, that I have not been able to find a new bike anywhere near my price range that is as comfortable as the Colnago or that handles as well. Actually I doubt there are many bikes at any price that handle as well. I'm 52-years old and don't race, so speed isn't such a big deal. That being said I'm pretty sure I couldn't afford anything faster either.

I also have a modern Raleigh CX bike, which is a lot of fun to ride. After various modifications, I have about twice as much money in it as in the old steel bike, but it still isn't as comfy and doesn't behave as well. Old or new, a high-quality steel bike is just magic.

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=424925

I love the classics and though I am more than happy with a small fleet, there will still be that last bike to be collected. There will be no rest until that Colnago Nuovo Mexico is in my shop.

My '88 Cannondale Criterium Series is stiff, light, efficient and fast. A Trek 760 is a professional grade racer that is as elegant as it is fast. The newer bikes havent caught my eye or heart. Maybe in 20yrs.