What's so great about new bikes?
04-18-14, 06:20 PM
#77
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,700
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
4 Posts
hmm... not so sure about this. I'm pretty sure you will have to do more work with the heavier bike, especially if there are hills involved. I'm no physics expert, but I do know that vertical work is a function of mass. I guess maybe you get some of it back on the way down in the form of kinetic energy but a lot of that will get eaten up by wind resistance.
On level ground, it's drag, which I'm assuming the bike choice doesn't impact.
How hard you work determines how hard your workout is. The impact of a workout isn't fixed by the total energy expended on the workout. Short hard intervals don't expend that much energy, while a 2-hour z1 ride does.
04-18-14, 06:32 PM
#78
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 1,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'm a big guy - I'll never see the low side of 225 pounds again. (Haven't since about the 7th grade.) I'm built like an NFL lineman. When I was last fitted, the owner of the LBS couldn't get a handlebar wide enough for my shoulders, so we had to make do with a dinky little 24-incher! I'm not too concerned about the extra weight of, say, an aluminum frame and fork vs. a carbon fiber jobbie - Heck, the difference is probably less than one of my size 14 shoes. This gives me a different perspective on things:
1. I'm suspicious of this modern frame geometry, with that sloping top tube, and with the long exposed seat post. I can just imagine that seat tube snapping, and there I am at the Proctologist's getting a seat-post-ectomy! No thanks. I'll stick with a nice old-fashioned geometry with a level top tube and only a couple of inches of seat post exposed.
2. I kinda like friction shifters. I like how they can be trimmed, and how reliable and low-maintenance they are. I even have a bike with downtube shifters, but I have to admit that I don't shift as much as I do on my Long Haul Trucker (a GREAT bike for a big guy!) with the bar-end shifters. I'm just getting back in the saddle after recovering from a broken knee and sprained rotator cuff, and am still a little wobbly reaching down there at age 62!
Beyond those two things, the modern bikes with their gazillion gears are wonderful. And for the same amount of adjusted-for-inflation dollars you can get a heck of a lot better bike today for the most part.
1. I'm suspicious of this modern frame geometry, with that sloping top tube, and with the long exposed seat post. I can just imagine that seat tube snapping, and there I am at the Proctologist's getting a seat-post-ectomy! No thanks. I'll stick with a nice old-fashioned geometry with a level top tube and only a couple of inches of seat post exposed.
2. I kinda like friction shifters. I like how they can be trimmed, and how reliable and low-maintenance they are. I even have a bike with downtube shifters, but I have to admit that I don't shift as much as I do on my Long Haul Trucker (a GREAT bike for a big guy!) with the bar-end shifters. I'm just getting back in the saddle after recovering from a broken knee and sprained rotator cuff, and am still a little wobbly reaching down there at age 62!
Beyond those two things, the modern bikes with their gazillion gears are wonderful. And for the same amount of adjusted-for-inflation dollars you can get a heck of a lot better bike today for the most part.
04-18-14, 07:42 PM
#79
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Go Ducks!
Posts: 1,549
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I've been wondering,
People have told me there have been a lot of advancements and improvements in bikes recently in terms of geometry and stuff. How does that translate to the actual riding experience? Assuming you have an old 80's Schwinn (like I do) which is properly fitted and well maintained, how would the experience be different on an equivalent, modern bike with similar tires etc? It would probably weigh less and modern shifters are convenient but beyond that, what are the advantages of being on a new bike?
Thanks.
People have told me there have been a lot of advancements and improvements in bikes recently in terms of geometry and stuff. How does that translate to the actual riding experience? Assuming you have an old 80's Schwinn (like I do) which is properly fitted and well maintained, how would the experience be different on an equivalent, modern bike with similar tires etc? It would probably weigh less and modern shifters are convenient but beyond that, what are the advantages of being on a new bike?
Thanks.
Beyond that pretty much everything has gotten better since an 80's Schwinn.
But! What really matters to a recreational rider is fit and whether your bike inspires you to ride.
04-19-14, 09:07 AM
#80
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The advancements in regards to racing/sport bikes are huge.
There is not one area that has not moved forward substantially since the 80s.
The tapered headset is a major improvement in front end stability and control- substantial.
New drivetrains are faster, lighter and offer more gear range and efficient cadence
the efficiency of the entire package is upgraded quite a bit over an 80s bike.
If you are not interested in the performance aspects, a more modern road bike can offer better fit and capability at a lighter weight.
With the advent of much stronger (yet lighter) component and frame standards, even the low-mid range bikes have gained a lot over old stuff.
I see you prefaced your question with "properly fitted". However, I think you will be surprised at what the newer frames allow in terms of fit.
There's something to be said for the old steel bikes, but I don't look at the past through rose colored glasses either.
I see people building up old racing bikes like the VITUS and ALAN aluminum bikes from the 80s. Those were crap frames!
When I started racing as a junior, I was given old stuff to race on. I didn't have any money and the team gave me what was free.
Mostly raced a Bianchi Columbus SL frameset (nice) but did use those early aluminum bikes and they were crap.
Even the old, revered Columbus frames had unacceptable flex compared to today's bikes.
Even on a budget, one can build up a Dura Ace or Ultegra bike that is 5-10yrs old and enjoy most of the benefits of riding a modern bike.
And that "budget build" would be an incredibly high quality bike!
If you're just tooling around, than it really doesn't matter.
Although I will argue that even the casual rider will enjoy riding a 25lb modern road bike over a 40lb old school steel bike.
Most people that don't care, buy based on cost and style of bike.
So, a $150 beach cruiser might be what they want.
There is not one area that has not moved forward substantially since the 80s.
The tapered headset is a major improvement in front end stability and control- substantial.
New drivetrains are faster, lighter and offer more gear range and efficient cadence
the efficiency of the entire package is upgraded quite a bit over an 80s bike.
If you are not interested in the performance aspects, a more modern road bike can offer better fit and capability at a lighter weight.
With the advent of much stronger (yet lighter) component and frame standards, even the low-mid range bikes have gained a lot over old stuff.
I see you prefaced your question with "properly fitted". However, I think you will be surprised at what the newer frames allow in terms of fit.
There's something to be said for the old steel bikes, but I don't look at the past through rose colored glasses either.
I see people building up old racing bikes like the VITUS and ALAN aluminum bikes from the 80s. Those were crap frames!
When I started racing as a junior, I was given old stuff to race on. I didn't have any money and the team gave me what was free.
Mostly raced a Bianchi Columbus SL frameset (nice) but did use those early aluminum bikes and they were crap.
Even the old, revered Columbus frames had unacceptable flex compared to today's bikes.
Even on a budget, one can build up a Dura Ace or Ultegra bike that is 5-10yrs old and enjoy most of the benefits of riding a modern bike.
And that "budget build" would be an incredibly high quality bike!
If you're just tooling around, than it really doesn't matter.
Although I will argue that even the casual rider will enjoy riding a 25lb modern road bike over a 40lb old school steel bike.
Most people that don't care, buy based on cost and style of bike.
So, a $150 beach cruiser might be what they want.
I have no doubt that tapered headsets are better, I'm not sure how they differ though. I'm wondering how it offers better control. Assuming any headset is secure and rotates freely, what other factors determine the amount of control or stability it offers?
I'm also wondering about fit. On any bike, you can change the cranks to a different size, and the saddle and handlebars can be replaced and/or moved back and forward and up and down. If those are in the right places, what else affects the bike fit?
On drivetrains; Newer ones have more gears and shifting is easier, is that what makes them faster?
The frames I can understand. I've heard that the newer aluminum frames are a lot better than the older ones and I can understand wanting a stiffer frame if there's a lot of flex.
My old steel bike actually is about 25 pounds, fenders and rack bring it up a bit more. I'm assuming the 40 pounders are more the low end dime store bikes that an enthusiast wouldn't be interested in. Anyway, anything that weighs substantially less than what I have is probably out of my price range.
04-19-14, 09:33 AM
#81
Senior Member
I have a 1976 Columbus double butted Italian steel frame I bought in 1976, still my main ride. 10 years ago I replaced the campy grouppo with a new campy 10 speed set up, the Athena to maintain the polished aluminum look. Wonderful ride, 22 LBS now.
10 years ago I also wanted to finally get a new bike and bought the Merlin carbon/Ti Lunaris win Zipp wheels and campy pro ten speed. Great ride and great bike but I still love old faithful.
10 years ago I also wanted to finally get a new bike and bought the Merlin carbon/Ti Lunaris win Zipp wheels and campy pro ten speed. Great ride and great bike but I still love old faithful.
04-19-14, 09:34 AM
#82
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 6,319
Bikes: 2012 Salsa Casseroll, 2009 Kona Blast
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1031 Post(s)
Liked 208 Times
in
146 Posts
Interesting points. Hopefully someone can help me understand some of the details.
I have no doubt that tapered headsets are better, I'm not sure how they differ though. I'm wondering how it offers better control. Assuming any headset is secure and rotates freely, what other factors determine the amount of control or stability it offers?
I'm also wondering about fit. On any bike, you can change the cranks to a different size, and the saddle and handlebars can be replaced and/or moved back and forward and up and down. If those are in the right places, what else affects the bike fit?
On drivetrains; Newer ones have more gears and shifting is easier, is that what makes them faster?
The frames I can understand. I've heard that the newer aluminum frames are a lot better than the older ones and I can understand wanting a stiffer frame if there's a lot of flex.
My old steel bike actually is about 25 pounds, fenders and rack bring it up a bit more. I'm assuming the 40 pounders are more the low end dime store bikes that an enthusiast wouldn't be interested in. Anyway, anything that weighs substantially less than what I have is probably out of my price range.
I have no doubt that tapered headsets are better, I'm not sure how they differ though. I'm wondering how it offers better control. Assuming any headset is secure and rotates freely, what other factors determine the amount of control or stability it offers?
I'm also wondering about fit. On any bike, you can change the cranks to a different size, and the saddle and handlebars can be replaced and/or moved back and forward and up and down. If those are in the right places, what else affects the bike fit?
On drivetrains; Newer ones have more gears and shifting is easier, is that what makes them faster?
The frames I can understand. I've heard that the newer aluminum frames are a lot better than the older ones and I can understand wanting a stiffer frame if there's a lot of flex.
My old steel bike actually is about 25 pounds, fenders and rack bring it up a bit more. I'm assuming the 40 pounders are more the low end dime store bikes that an enthusiast wouldn't be interested in. Anyway, anything that weighs substantially less than what I have is probably out of my price range.
Despite what French Fit says, more gears does help with cadence. It isn't that an old 5 or 6 speed freewheel is hell on wheels, and of course there is the whole fixed gear craze, but with a 9, 10, or 11 speed cassette, you don't have to trade off between plenty of climbing gears and small jumps between gears. As I said earlier, even going from 7 speed to 6 speed, which I did for a time was noticeable.
Last edited by MRT2; 04-19-14 at 11:53 AM.
04-19-14, 12:32 PM
#84
Senior Member
Interesting points. Hopefully someone can help me understand some of the details.
I have no doubt that tapered headsets are better, I'm not sure how they differ though. I'm wondering how it offers better control. Assuming any headset is secure and rotates freely, what other factors determine the amount of control or stability it offers?
rock solid stability. The improvement over even 1 1/8 headsets is big. For high speed cornering, descending, sprinting... generally creating a solid front end. There is measurable gain there. Sometimes significant.
I'm also wondering about fit. On any bike, you can change the cranks to a different size, and the saddle and handlebars can be replaced and/or moved back and forward and up and down. If those are in the right places, what else affects the bike fit?
There are some major changes in frame geometry for various activities and body types. Some, like 'sportive fit' (race like geo w/ longer wheelbase and tall headtube) offer fit that was impossible until recently. Integrated shift levers are a huge ergonomic, performance and safety advantage
On drivetrains; Newer ones have more gears and shifting is easier, is that what makes them faster?
by virtue of being easier, makes them faster. They are also more precise, which makes them faster.
The frames I can understand. I've heard that the newer aluminum frames are a lot better than the older ones and I can understand wanting a stiffer frame if there's a lot of flex.
My old steel bike actually is about 25 pounds, fenders and rack bring it up a bit more. I'm assuming the 40 pounders are more the low end dime store bikes that an enthusiast wouldn't be interested in. Anyway, anything that weighs substantially less than what I have is probably out of my price range.
I have no doubt that tapered headsets are better, I'm not sure how they differ though. I'm wondering how it offers better control. Assuming any headset is secure and rotates freely, what other factors determine the amount of control or stability it offers?
rock solid stability. The improvement over even 1 1/8 headsets is big. For high speed cornering, descending, sprinting... generally creating a solid front end. There is measurable gain there. Sometimes significant.
I'm also wondering about fit. On any bike, you can change the cranks to a different size, and the saddle and handlebars can be replaced and/or moved back and forward and up and down. If those are in the right places, what else affects the bike fit?
There are some major changes in frame geometry for various activities and body types. Some, like 'sportive fit' (race like geo w/ longer wheelbase and tall headtube) offer fit that was impossible until recently. Integrated shift levers are a huge ergonomic, performance and safety advantage
On drivetrains; Newer ones have more gears and shifting is easier, is that what makes them faster?
by virtue of being easier, makes them faster. They are also more precise, which makes them faster.
The frames I can understand. I've heard that the newer aluminum frames are a lot better than the older ones and I can understand wanting a stiffer frame if there's a lot of flex.
My old steel bike actually is about 25 pounds, fenders and rack bring it up a bit more. I'm assuming the 40 pounders are more the low end dime store bikes that an enthusiast wouldn't be interested in. Anyway, anything that weighs substantially less than what I have is probably out of my price range.
If one is even somewhat versed on bikes, the used market has probably 80-90% of the tech at pennies on the dollar.
Just a quick aside about friction shifting on road bikes. It sucks compared to STI. The faster you go,the more on the rivit you are, the more of a disadvantage it is.
Riding in a pack? You are at a distinct disadvantage. STI is safer, faster shifiting, and not by a small amount.
04-19-14, 02:56 PM
#85
Senior Member
Turning and sprinting put a twisting force on the frame, and the idea behind the tapered headtube is to provide additional stiffness to resist that twist. The resulting of the twist is that the wheels come out of perfect front-to-back alignment, and that has an effect on how predictably the bike tracks in corners and how responsive it is. A stiffer headtube helps handling and responsiveness by reducing the amount of twisting. I haven't ridden a bike with a tapered headtube, but the stiffer front end on a modern bike definitely helps give them a sharper feel. How noticeable this is really depends on how you ride and how sensitive you are.
04-19-14, 03:06 PM
#86
I'm doing it wrong.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,875
Bikes: Rivendell Appaloosa, Rivendell Frank Jones Sr., Trek Fuel EX9, Kona Jake the Snake CR, Niner Sir9
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9742 Post(s)
Liked 2,812 Times
in
1,664 Posts
even new road bikes in the $500 range will offer many of those things. There is no advantage to your bike, bar vintage appeal, the fact you already own it, have good memories about it. That's how far the development has progressed. Doesn't mean your bike is bad, but you are asking "what's so great about new bikes"... so the answer is, just about everything.
If one is even somewhat versed on bikes, the used market has probably 80-90% of the tech at pennies on the dollar.
Just a quick aside about friction shifting on road bikes. It sucks compared to STI. The faster you go,the more on the rivit you are, the more of a disadvantage it is.
Riding in a pack? You are at a distinct disadvantage. STI is safer, faster shifiting, and not by a small amount.
If one is even somewhat versed on bikes, the used market has probably 80-90% of the tech at pennies on the dollar.
Just a quick aside about friction shifting on road bikes. It sucks compared to STI. The faster you go,the more on the rivit you are, the more of a disadvantage it is.
Riding in a pack? You are at a distinct disadvantage. STI is safer, faster shifiting, and not by a small amount.
04-19-14, 03:09 PM
#87
Senior Member
04-19-14, 03:15 PM
#88
I'm doing it wrong.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,875
Bikes: Rivendell Appaloosa, Rivendell Frank Jones Sr., Trek Fuel EX9, Kona Jake the Snake CR, Niner Sir9
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9742 Post(s)
Liked 2,812 Times
in
1,664 Posts
Yeah, pretty clear what my thoughts are; I think you are incorrect with your absolute statement. I don't think indexed brifters are safer than friction shifting even in a group ride. I've ridden them both and have seen enough people completely ****ing up their shifting using new modern stuff to know that what you are using to shift isn't the problem, it's how you use it.
04-19-14, 03:23 PM
#89
Senior Member
Yeah, pretty clear what my thoughts are; I think you are incorrect with your absolute statement. I don't think indexed brifters are safer than friction shifting even in a group ride. I've ridden them both and have seen enough people completely ****ing up their shifting using new modern stuff to know that what you are using to shift isn't the problem, it's how you use it.
being able to shift and brake while keeping both hands on the bars, without even moving your hands
that's not safer than taking your hand off the handlebar
Shifting while standing,
shifting while sprinting
shifting while navigating the pack
shifting while negotiating the course
all with your hands on the bars
that's not an advantage
it's not "how you use it" STI is simply better in many aspects.
I don't know how many times I have to say this, but there's nothing wrong with the old stuff.
However, since you have no interest in context and just want to start arguing, have at it.
I'm out.
04-19-14, 03:27 PM
#90
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Central PA
Posts: 629
Bikes: Cannondale Six5, Specialized Stumpjumper FSR & old Hard Rock
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I'm 6'4 , north of 200lbs, wear a size 14 shoe and am fit. I LOVE riding my newer style roadbikes compared to the older geometry. Although friction shifting is bliss in it's simplicity, STI keeps your hands on your bars, is quick / effortless and your eyes out in front. Like others have said, it is nice to have a frame I fit / integrate to (no sloping top tubes on either of my Cdales) rather that the older steel stuff had 16 inches of headtube & an equidistant toptube. Not looking to argue, but shifting aside, you should give the frames a serious try.
04-19-14, 03:54 PM
#91
Asleep at the bars
Join Date: May 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA and Treasure Island, FL
Posts: 1,743
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked 203 Times
in
135 Posts
Modern frames are very good at absorbing chatter without lengthening the chainstays, allowing a well-performing short bike. In the olden days as embodied by e.g. Peter Johnson you used a bigger tire at lower pressure and a slightly longer and relatively taller frame than on a modern bike. Modern bikes of a comparable price tier ($3k+ frame) can easily be run at 23mm 100+ psi without chatter on less than perfect surfaces.
Other than that, modern bikes have the proper wheel spacing (130mm) to fit contemporary wheels, which is what you need to use contemporary groupsets. And if you want a bike that can easily be shifted while standing on an uphill for instance, you need bar shifters. The contemporary riding style with an emphasis on higher cadence requires more shifting than mashing to maintain cadence.
Modern frames fit modern steerers and hence stems, which you need to use modern shaped bars. To me, few things are as uncomfortable after 3-4 hours as the narrow tubing of vintage bars. I like my flat top oversize carbon bars. No going back on this one. Metal bars are also higher thermally conductive, meaning they're colder in cold temps and hotter in hot temps. Which reduces tape choices to those thermally insulating (= foam).
Modern frames fit modern BBs which you need to use modern cranks, which you need to use modern groupsets, which you need to use bar shifters.
Modern wheels are quite a step up. Since the frame is what eats chatter rather than the tires of vintage bikes, the wheel has shifted from being suspended to unsuspended weight and become more noticeable in road feel and handling.
Other than that, modern bikes have the proper wheel spacing (130mm) to fit contemporary wheels, which is what you need to use contemporary groupsets. And if you want a bike that can easily be shifted while standing on an uphill for instance, you need bar shifters. The contemporary riding style with an emphasis on higher cadence requires more shifting than mashing to maintain cadence.
Modern frames fit modern steerers and hence stems, which you need to use modern shaped bars. To me, few things are as uncomfortable after 3-4 hours as the narrow tubing of vintage bars. I like my flat top oversize carbon bars. No going back on this one. Metal bars are also higher thermally conductive, meaning they're colder in cold temps and hotter in hot temps. Which reduces tape choices to those thermally insulating (= foam).
Modern frames fit modern BBs which you need to use modern cranks, which you need to use modern groupsets, which you need to use bar shifters.
Modern wheels are quite a step up. Since the frame is what eats chatter rather than the tires of vintage bikes, the wheel has shifted from being suspended to unsuspended weight and become more noticeable in road feel and handling.
04-19-14, 05:02 PM
#92
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Wow, lots of information and interesting opinions.
I was thinking of buying a new bike for a while. My budget is around $1200 so I wouldn't be enjoying some of the higher end goodness or carbon fiber finery.
It's actually been a few years since I've really ridden but I'm getting back into it this year. I finally decided to wait on the new bike purchase until I put in some miles with the one I have. When I get a better idea of the type of riding I've been doing and what I wish I had versus what I do have I'll be able to make a more informed decision.
I was thinking of buying a new bike for a while. My budget is around $1200 so I wouldn't be enjoying some of the higher end goodness or carbon fiber finery.
It's actually been a few years since I've really ridden but I'm getting back into it this year. I finally decided to wait on the new bike purchase until I put in some miles with the one I have. When I get a better idea of the type of riding I've been doing and what I wish I had versus what I do have I'll be able to make a more informed decision.
04-19-14, 05:21 PM
#93
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,078
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
4 Posts
Wow, lots of information and interesting opinions.
I was thinking of buying a new bike for a while. My budget is around $1200 so I wouldn't be enjoying some of the higher end goodness or carbon fiber finery.
It's actually been a few years since I've really ridden but I'm getting back into it this year. I finally decided to wait on the new bike purchase until I put in some miles with the one I have. When I get a better idea of the type of riding I've been doing and what I wish I had versus what I do have I'll be able to make a more informed decision.
I was thinking of buying a new bike for a while. My budget is around $1200 so I wouldn't be enjoying some of the higher end goodness or carbon fiber finery.
It's actually been a few years since I've really ridden but I'm getting back into it this year. I finally decided to wait on the new bike purchase until I put in some miles with the one I have. When I get a better idea of the type of riding I've been doing and what I wish I had versus what I do have I'll be able to make a more informed decision.
04-19-14, 05:32 PM
#94
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,078
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
4 Posts
Modern bikes combine much higher rigidity with better ride comfort. Their larger steerer tubes, stems, handlebars, and downtubes flex a lot less but the carbon forks and seatstays absorb shock better.
You may or may not need maximum power transfer but it's nice when you don't feel the bike flexing around when you pedal hard.
I have a Super Vitus 971 frame from 1980 and it is one of the thinnest walled frames of its size ever made but I don't think it gave as good a ride as a lighter, more rigid frame from 2007. Both had a fairly steep fork angle and short chainstays. The newer frame had carbon seatstays. Unfortunately, few new bikes seem to have those; frames are either all carbon or all aluminum. Maybe aluminum is good enough if it is given a modern wishbone shape.
European road frames from the 50s and 60s supposedly had longer stays and a shallower fork angle in order to help cope with rough or cobblestoned roads. These bikes may be the ones which gave steel frames their reputation for super ride.
The improved comfort of a sloping top tube is nice.
One huge improvement is brake hoods. It's great to be able to hold on to those. The brake levers can be operated when you ride the hoods, unlike when you hold the center of a drop bar. It's a very comfortable way to steer.
You may or may not need maximum power transfer but it's nice when you don't feel the bike flexing around when you pedal hard.
I have a Super Vitus 971 frame from 1980 and it is one of the thinnest walled frames of its size ever made but I don't think it gave as good a ride as a lighter, more rigid frame from 2007. Both had a fairly steep fork angle and short chainstays. The newer frame had carbon seatstays. Unfortunately, few new bikes seem to have those; frames are either all carbon or all aluminum. Maybe aluminum is good enough if it is given a modern wishbone shape.
European road frames from the 50s and 60s supposedly had longer stays and a shallower fork angle in order to help cope with rough or cobblestoned roads. These bikes may be the ones which gave steel frames their reputation for super ride.
The improved comfort of a sloping top tube is nice.
One huge improvement is brake hoods. It's great to be able to hold on to those. The brake levers can be operated when you ride the hoods, unlike when you hold the center of a drop bar. It's a very comfortable way to steer.
04-19-14, 06:19 PM
#95
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: western Massachusetts (greater Springfield area)
Posts: 699
Bikes: Velosolex St. Tropez, LeMond Zurich (spine bike), Rotator swb recumbent
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 67 Times
in
32 Posts
I got one of those at the swap shop at the dump several years ago (actually it must have been 8 or 9). It was a nice bike after being refurbished. If it had fit me, I would have kept it, but it was too small, (at the time I was riding the bike I bought in 1976) so I donated it to local relocated refugees from Somalia and bought a new bike.
I think the biggest difference is the shifting. Pedals, handlebar width and so on are also factors, but it is easy to update those on an older bike.
I think the biggest difference is the shifting. Pedals, handlebar width and so on are also factors, but it is easy to update those on an older bike.
04-19-14, 07:58 PM
#96
Senior Member
All bikes are good. Just depends on how geeky you want to get, and the depth of your wallet.
04-19-14, 08:53 PM
#97
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Buffalo New York
Posts: 2,470
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
so take everyting that people have said.
shifting
gearing
comfort
weight
stability
frame materials
geometry
aesthetics
wheels
if you get a very small improvement from each factor, even if its just barely noticable, then you have 10 - 12 things that have been improved. they all build on top of each other and result in a large combined improvement
$1200 bucks huh??
great option for the cash
Save Up To 60% Off Shimano Carbon Road Bikes- Motobecane Sprintour
shifting
gearing
comfort
weight
stability
frame materials
geometry
aesthetics
wheels
if you get a very small improvement from each factor, even if its just barely noticable, then you have 10 - 12 things that have been improved. they all build on top of each other and result in a large combined improvement
$1200 bucks huh??
great option for the cash
Save Up To 60% Off Shimano Carbon Road Bikes- Motobecane Sprintour
__________________
2010 Kestrel RT900SL, 800k carbon, chorus/record, speedplay, zonda
2000 litespeed Unicoi Ti, XTR,XT, Campy crank, time atac, carbon forks
2010 Kestrel RT900SL, 800k carbon, chorus/record, speedplay, zonda
2000 litespeed Unicoi Ti, XTR,XT, Campy crank, time atac, carbon forks
04-19-14, 09:58 PM
#98
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
04-19-14, 10:14 PM
#99
Senior Member
Good plan. Not only are vintage bikes inexpensive but they never go down in value as long as you take care of them. You can buy them, ride them for awhile and if you want you can sell them later and get all your money back. Can't say that about a new bike. Kinda like new vs. used cars, as soon as they leave the lot (or bike shop) the value goes way down. The difference is, with bikes you don't run so much of a risk of them breaking down like with a car because bikes are simple to fix. Sure new bikes have some modern technological features, but for the most part, it's the engine that matters. Of course nothing wrong with buying a new bike if you can afford it and want it (disclaimer for the new bike aficionados).
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
RockiesDad
General Cycling Discussion
18
04-26-16 03:15 AM
jkahrs595
Classic & Vintage
20
08-20-10 12:53 AM
