Rickalodeon

The Classic & Vintage forum may be the wrong forum to ask this question, but I'm hoping that there's some objective perspectives on the subject....

This is my first year of real road cycling. I have an '88 Univega Supra Sport that I've had since I was a kid. I've never been able to bring myself to jettison it - I simply like how it looks. So in the spring, I tuned it up, got it road worthy and off I went. I've since been bitten by the cycling bug which is my latest obsession. In the past several months, I've upgraded all components except for the wheels (which I plan to do this winter), handlebars and stem, and seatpost. I've had almost as much fun working on it as I have riding it. My philosophy has been to upgrade components to appreciate some contemporary benefits (e.g. brifters have made for easier shifting during climbs). I did my first century ride last month....It rode well and performed perfectly. I had no more or less discomforts than anyone else in the event

At the moment, I don't subscribe to the "shed bike weight at all costs" theory. While I appreciate that less weight helps, I'm more inclined to tune the engine (me) before investing more serious money to reduce bike weight by a few pounds. And....While I really like the looks of some of the new bikes, I just can't cost justify a purchase for the performance gains. Although if I were to pull the trigger, it would more likely be something like a Motobecane at a more reasonable price than something from a "Bike Boutique".

Oddly, I keep trying to talk myself into a new bike, but can't come up with a practical argument to do so. I'm wondering if anyone out there has a pragmatic perspective on appreciable benefits of the new bikes....beyond the components. Any insights would be helpful....thanks.

icepick_trotsky 

Stick with the older stuff. You know you like it and you know how to work on it. New bikes do not offer any performance benefit other than weight, and you can achieve that through C&V too, and for a much lower price. For the same price as a brand new carbon bike, you could buy almost any Columbus or Reynolds steel frame you want.

The Golden Boy 

I don't have much of an attraction to new bikes. If I were to get a new bike- it would be a whole lot like one of my 30 year old bikes with some 25 year old components.

One of my *someday* projects is to dump a few thousand dollars into a custom built bike. Again, very much like a 30 year old bike. Redundancy.

iab

Riding a new bike is different from riding an old bike.

That is all.

It is neither better nor worse.

Spend your money as you please. Bikes are a want and typically not a need.

ofgit

On 'not so high end' bikes from the '80s, the first performance upgrades I like to make are hubs/wheels and pedals like Superbe Pro, Dura Ace, Campagnolo from the same era as the bikes. Also change the stems to get the bar up to saddle height and maybe a saddle change. New tires too.

Rickalodeon

One could say that for most similar decisions in life. In my golfing days, I recall buying a set of clubs because I liked how they looked...and, of course, there were some technology benefits. It turns out that they didn't appreciably improve my game. After the novelty of their looks wore off, I became disappointed having realized that I'd thrown away so much money on that which hadn't improved my performance - lesson learned.

You're right about want vs. need. I should have clarified in the original post. What I want is to improve my cycling performance and I'm not sure if there are any logical arguments for new equipment. The several discussions I've had on the subject invariably break down to weight...nothing more.

Kobe 

Split the difference and pick up a used bike that is a few years old. Let someone else take the big depreciation hit, while you find out if you like a more modern bike.

If you find you like the Univega better you can turn around and sell it for nearly what you paid.

If you have the room, keep both bikes and enjoy the pleasures of both bikes.

Rickalodeon

I've done all but the stems. Why get the bar up to saddle height?

Rickalodeon

Not a bad thought Why do I get the feeling that this obsession is going to result in a few more bike purchases?

SJX426 

I cannot justify nearly any new bike in any price range due to what is out there on CL, etc. Weight is one thing component performance is another. You got it right about the engine. My most modern single bike is a '97 Rockhopper and it is fine for commuting but I am not happy with the shifting performance (all stock parts). The 91 Pinarello Montello with Dura Ace is sweet. There isn't much to wish for in terms of operational performance. On that bike it is all about me. At times it is hard to keep up with it! It is very willing to go up hills and drag me along. Even my 83 Colnago Superissimo is much the same except it is full friction instead of index but both are DT shifted. I can't imagine nor do I want to be exposed to anything newer (my wallet couldn't accommodate the step function in cost) because I am happy with 20+ year old technology.

iab

You will get more bang for your buck from a coach. Armstrong is right, it is not about the bike.

ofgit

Comfort. I'm not comfortable in and can't maintain an 'aggressive, aero position' on a bike.

jimmuller 

You're asking us???

That's like asking a wino if wine is any good. Or asking a...well, you get the idea.

As for what looks better, it depends on whether you want a TREK TREK TREK or a SPECIALIZED SPECIALIZED SPECIALIZED or a Motobecane. YMMV, of course.

Rickalodeon

LOL...of course, you're right. But I also wondered if there were folks out there that could attest to their performance as compared to their riding buddies...or based on 1st hand experience, could provide some additional insight that I had not considered.

fender1

I have three road bikes. All steel, 2 old and one new. They each have a specific role. The old, road racing bike is for times when I don't need fenders and only want to carry the minimum. Tight geometry, quick handling.

The fendered road bike (old) is for days when the weather is not so geat or might rain nad I might need to carry a small amount of stuff (Jacket/ gloves etc.) in a rear saddle bag. Light-ish and comfortable

The (new) steel bike is the dedicated commuter bike. Dyno hub, lights, racks bags etc. It is for getting to work and running errands. It is the heaviest of the three but is super comfortable and funtional.

I tend to think of bikes as tools and picking the right one can make the ride a bit more fun.

upthywazzoo 

My first real bike was a 1983 Schwinn Traveler that I used in college. I'd never had a road bike before so this was a totally new experience for me. I went through a phase where I was spending quite a bit on it (even though it was perfectly rideable from the start); new seat, new wheels, new cables, car wax, cleaning solutions, tools, etc etc. I just wanted the bike to look good. It was also too big for me, at 59cm.

After I graduated I became more interested in cycling, and C&V and had the great fortune to buy my baby: a "mylanta green" Trek 770. I have spent more money on this one bike alone than all my other bikes combined, including their purchase costs. There was nothing wrong with the 6sp Super Record group--at least not for the riding I do. But I felt the need to upgrade, to personalize, to stand out. I started with the accessories. I googled "80s color palette" and ended up with an obnoxious color combination I'm still using now.

Then my own wheelset, because I like clinchers. After that I started changing parts to a mix of old and new Dura-Ace, because Dura-Ace is cool. Out of a desire to "save money", and "keep the vintage look" I went for the 7800 downtube shifters. Most recently, I decided to complete the group with 7800 STI shifters and another wheelset, new stem, and new bars.

While this was going on, I acquired more bikes. My "grail" bike: a Miyata Team. A "pretty" bike: a Lotus Supreme. Throw a Trek 720, a Cucchietti, some random titanium frame, and 91/92 Lemond Tourmalet into the mix and we've arrived at present day. I'll admit something a bit scary: I have not ridden anything but my Trek. In fact, none of those bikes besides the Trek have even been built up. I'm still working on that, slowly.

In any case, every time I made a new purchase, it was because I wanted to try or work on something different. Maybe something better? Maybe I just wanted to be like daf1009, or Robbietunes with their huge and ever changing collections. There is definitely a pleasure in having something different than what you had before. I went from having a pretty good idea of what I wanted--to not being all that sure of what I wanted or whether or not the purchases I was making were even worth it. At some point, I will finish all these bikes. I don't know if I'm going to keep all of them (except for the Trek, because he is special). At the end of the day, I highly doubt that any of the bikes will be all that different from each other in terms of performance to me--I'm just another "Fred" experiencing the thrill of newness.

For this reason, I will never buy a modern production bike. The new bike, new car feeling is not really genuine. A Pinarello Dogma or BMC Time Machine is not going to give me back that moment of bliss the first time I put the Trek on the road in 40 degree weather in early March. I'm not going to experience again that feeling of triumph doing my first perfect upshift without looking at the downtube. They're not going to recreate the beautiful sunset I watched over the Yodo River in Japan that made me stop riding and get off the bike and stare in wonder. They don't have the chip on the bottom bracket shell from where the wrench slipped when I was trying to remove a lockring. What makes me love my Trek so much is that I had all these great experiences on and off it, and those experiences make the bike MINE. No other bike will do that for me--superior performance or not. At this point, the only way I could top the Trek would be to get a custom-made bicycle--and that would only guarantee that it fit marginally better and be a great piece of art. It won't even come with good memories, but perhaps the promise of new ones.

New bike vs old bike? For me, it's a no-brainer. Performance isn't even a factor. Carbon? Di2? Whatever. No other bike will ever be the Trek, and that's good enough for me.

Giacomo 1 

Steel is fine, as you proved on that century, but I do kind of get the draw to the newer stuff. I drive an old 79 Fiat Spider, and while it's a blast to drive, I wouldn't want to drive it daily. Light years behind my new Cadillac ATS.

My thing is asthetics, and I really love the looks of the older bikes. Plus I can now afford the bikes of my youth that I couldn't then. You can buy quite a few very nice C&V bikes for the price of one good CF bike. And if you keep hanging out here, that's exactly what will happen!

tmh657

Yep. I have 4 steel bikes, I know just 4. 1 modern bike that I had to have to fit in with the carbon crowd. So I fit in. How often do I ride the modern bike? Hardly ever.

I just rode the MS 100 this past weekend on my steel Serotta. It does have a Campy 10 speed drive train and pretty light wheels. Most of the CF bikes look the same to me. I saw one other Serotta. Fitting in is not a priority. Riding what feels good is. Oh and I think my Serotta is darn good looking to boot.

Pars 

You switched to brifters, yet still have the original wheelset on it? 7 speed brifters?

At any rate, I'd agree with most posters. I think a wheel upgrade is typically the most bang for the buck you can do on a bike. Quality hubs (even vintage, like Campy Record) are a huge improvement over most other vintage components, and still hang with the new stuff quite well, particularly for durability. Better rims, stainless spokes. etc. You might even think about building your own set, out of components you spec, since you seem to like working on the bike. It isn't as hard as it might seem.

As for the new bike, as iab said, its your money and do what you want. As one other poster alluded to, but got wrong a bit I think, you can grab a top of the line vintage steel bike, complete with full high end Campy/Shimano for much less than a new bike. Something like a De Rosa / Colnago / Merckx you should be able to get complete for $2K or less. See how much of a new bike that buys you

Also, new steel is supposed to be really nice. The one person's Serotta (probably Ti?), a Kirk, a Chris Kvale, etc. are all top end and will kind of bridge the old/new.

Chrome Molly

Old bike, new components: Stick with that approach. I have ridden my 85 Trek 760 on many rides among a sea of carbon. Knowing I'm not at the front of the pack I just appreciate the ride of the wonderful steel frame, and make new friends along the way (aka save your money). When you get really into riding, then find your dream machine.

The only place that I feel carbon has a real practical 40 something year old guy advantage is on gravel. Somehow the quelled and unexciting ride of carbon would work on hard pack limestone roads with crap strewn across the top. Not sure why I think that, but vintage steel is just fine everywhere else (on or off road).

Vera

Always is good give a new live to a old bike

bikemig 

zombie thread alert. but you won't get any argument in C&V about why we all need more old bikes,

wrk101

Financially, a new bike really does not make sense. What CAN make sense is a lightly used modern bike, say 5 to 10 years old. I see lightly used modern bikes of that age at about 25% of new price, if not even less.

Now a new bike CAN be a bargain if it provides the motivation to ride, get moving, exercise, etc. So I am not knocking the concept. But considered as just a financial transaction, there are better options.

Some people desire many of the modern features: light weight carbon fiber parts, more gears, better brakes, STI shifting. Then a good lightly used modern bike can be a tremendous value.

People like myself who don't mind down tube or bar end shifters, fewer gears are OK, love the look of steel, and are resourceful acquiring USED parts, then the older bikes can be a tremendous bargain. And if you are resourceful, you can modernize an older bike to have many of the features of the newer stuff. I have had the good fortune to come across some great deals on modern donor bikes, where I was able to sell just the frame later for more than the cost of the entire bike. Such upgrades are then basically free. It doesn't get much better than that. So some of my vintage bikes the only thing original is the frame and fork.

RobbieTunes

Get new wheels.
A cheeseburger.
A canoe.