Here me out here for a bit. As I embark in restoring a classic 80's steel italian bike, I continue to be impressed with some of the aesthetics of some of the components, paint jobs that are period correct, etc. Then, fast foward to 2006 and it seems everything just got fuglier by the 100th power!!! Delta brakes were gorgeous and so were some of the classic dura ace, but since then everything looks the same! Even the new "skeleton" look is more looking like the crap mountain bikers used to use back in the 80's but retro fitted to a road bike!! Then comes the bike looks and paint jobs these days. Most bikes look like the road biking version of Nascar Components seemed to have stayed pretty much the same until someone thought that carbon fiber on everything was a good thing. I mean, I love honey mustard, but it does not taste good on everything!!! They look simply ridiculous to me Then, there comes the frames themselves. I simply can't understand why is it that they all simply look the same. I mean, with very little variations, if you took the color and stickers away most people would have a hard time telling what bike they are getting Of course, except for the few that have some very distinctive, and yet ridiculous looking, features. What I can understand even less is that with the new carbon fiber technology and production methods, most bikes cost so much less to produce than they did back in the early 90's and yet they cost 3-7 times more!

Where did good taste go? Where did tastefully nice go? Who's fault is it: the advertisers, the manufacturers, or simply all of us that keep on buying them?

Don't get me wrong here. I am not passing judgement on anyone in particular here, nor am I trying to be offensive to anyone. Heck, I may end up buying one of those fugly nascar looking billboard with wheels filled with CF parts soon myself.

Retro grouch manifesto?

Is that Bootsie Collins in your avatar?

Mmmmmm..... Pie......

they thought Manet, Monet, Cezanne, Picasso, Matisse, etc were sh|t at the time, only for them to be loved later.

I'll hazzard a guess that 'the beef' will be pining away for a Madone in 20 years time, when he's 36 and fat, and doesn't have enough time to ride his bike, and his wife won't give him permission to buy one.

I think somebody left your frame out in the sun, it melted.

Boy, it sounds like someone is stuck in the past. Don't worry, it happens to all of us. For example, I love the classic styling of the late 80s Mustang LX Notch backs (sedans). Those are sweet! Now the later Mustangs are just eh to me. Of course this isn't the same for others but that's my favorite. I guess what I'm suggesting is you found something you liked and you're judging the rest based on the one you like instead of going with the flow and embracing new technology and styling.

And DrPete, I think you meant: "Mmmmm.... Pin...."

Mass production has a lot to do with it.

In the 70-80s, the most sought after bikes were full Campy Italian, which came from a tradition where many small bike manufacturers put out distinct bikes in relatively small numbers. So you had many variations in lugs, paint etc within manufacturers lines and also among different manufacturers.

Fast forward to today, and the most sought after bikes are machine made, either CF or until recently,aluminum, so all the bikes look essentially the same.

Or maybe we are just moving towards a "form follows function" asthetic, where decoration is left out.

I think I know what you're talking about, I myself go for that old traditional look...

Speaking of mass produced beauty...

Exhibit B: (The good Dr's being Exhibit A)

What's so bad about this?


Also, comparing cycling to NASCAR is insulting to everyone who rides.

That is simply not true. They were regarded as excellent at the time. Why do you think they stood to the test of time? There were hundreds or thousands of other painters from their times and you don't see their paintings around do you?

I see your point, but I do disagree with it. I do love new stuff and new styling and technology, but it seems bikes for one took a design/look turn that maybe it is simply against my personal taste or simply have not "progressed" much. I loved 50's Porsches for example, but couldn't care less for the new designs of the late 70's-80's. Loved them again in the 90's and now, but a few late models I could care less for. So, it is not simply a matter of new vs old looks. I love the 80's "classic" bikes and their looks, but I love them for what they are: an old classic looking bike from the 80's. I by no means wished all bikes today looked like back then.

I think you do have a very valid point here with the mass production vs the personal builders. It does make sense to me at least. Now, the decoration vs function part is probably not there even today. Look at the 2 CF bikes posted here already and tell meif all of it truly follows function

Again, even though it may not be my personal taste, I don't fail to see some of the "beauty" a lot of today's bikes have. It just seems like there is very little distinction between one and another

Easy tiger. Easy By the way, I love your signature quote

You don't think the new Carrera GT is the hottest car ever? Maybe you just have bad taste. LOL

Nascar? I see bikes like pinarellos, specialized, giant etc. as a kind of formula one type advertising standard

F1 is fine. Compare it to F1 or WRC Rally or whatever; Just not NASCAR.

What's wrong with you man? Next thing you are going to tell me there is something wrong with WWF wrestling or that it is fake? The nerve on some people

WWF? Cycling is more like professional boxing

What does it matter what a bike looks like if it rides great?

^When they all ride great we move on to factor number 2

Although I do agree with you almost completely, you are kidding yourself if you think people are buying $2-10K bikes because they "ride great" only.

You obviously never took any art history classes, and if you did, you slept during the slides like everybody else.

I feel dumber reading this thread

Maybe so...............

Time lends perspective. It's easy to look backwards and pick the wheat from the chaf.

It's why few timeless artists die wealthy.

Degas? Can't paint. Mozart? Too many notes.

Of course the best part of this is that popular garbage dies and is never resurrected.