KonAaron Snake 

If there is a problem with this forum it's that threads like this get more traction than ones with beautiful bikes in them.

I suggest any future posts to this thread have to contain photos of a modern bike you think classic.

gomango

Not too shabby.

EL-OS goodness for sure.

This one polarizes folks with its Precisa fork.

Straight forks get some people wound up around here, while others think they are just fine.

I happen to like the way it rides quite a bit.

A 1993/94 Colnago "Wordperfect" Elegant.

[IMG]DSCN5834 by gomango1849, on Flickr[/IMG]

[IMG]DSCN5832_2 by gomango1849, on Flickr[/IMG]

modelmartin

I like anything with round tubes and some sort of lugs. I don't care whether it is steel, carbon, alu, titanium.

likebike23

I don't think there should be any set rule for what qualifies as classic or vintage simply due to the fact that both are subjective terms anyway. No member has the right to dictate to another what they should think. If a bike doesn't do it for you just move along and let those with similar interests have a discussion.

Velognome 

Mmmmmmm....I'd have to disagree



Apologies to 10 speed gallery and the owner of this fine steed.

likebike23

Not my thing, but if somebody wants to post it and suffer the slings and arrows, that's their business.

noglider 

Good idea. Here is a bike that is about three years old or so. I like it.

KonAaron Snake 

Looks familiar - shame about the CF bits.

rootboy 

Really a shame about those unsightly humps on the handlebars…

rootboy 

but I'll get over it.

Chombi

Mehhhh..... just base it always on date of manufacture, as no matter what, for most of us, there had always been and will always be, bikes that had and will, irk our aesthetic senses so C&V can never be just based on how the bike looks to people anyway.....
The bike has to be at least 20 years old the cut off to qualify as C&V.......I think that's quite generous. New bikes built to old, "classic" designs can be considered "Neo-C&V" or "Continuation" models, so they are not confused with true C&V bikes. Just like when Carroll Shelby built his "Continuation" Cobras not so long ago.
There! Done Deal!

rootboy 

Twenty years? Heck…I have jeans older than that.

RaleighSport

Thank you for eloquently expressing that.. at least more eloquently than I had come up with. A lot of the move towards "modern" probably has to do with people my age as well.. where the 90's bikes would be the road bikes we'd recall well from youth, I am a product of the 80's but I definitely came into my tastes and adulthood in the 90's. Oh wait, does that mean this thread should probably be you damn millennials? (I'm not really a millennial, but according to some propaganda they've encroached on my age range as well.)

RobbieTunes

OK

RobbieTunes

I'd be able to post more, but my IBM AT386 machine has no inter..what?

KonAaron Snake 

Really beautiful build robbie - which crank is that?

bicyclridr4life

I spend most of my time in this forum, the beach cruiser, Hybrid, and Touring forums, and an occasional visit to the Mountain Bike. As my Beach Cruiser is a 1980's Huffy, it is considered crap in that forum. My Hybrid is a 2003 Giant Cypress DX - again, considered junk by that forum, My touring bikes (1989 KHS Mtn Bike and the aforementioned Giant) are considered trash; not suitable for touring - or anything else, for that matter. My mountain bikes range from the '89 KHS and 91 Diamondback, to a 2004 Pacific PK-7 full suspension bike ($88.00 on sale at Target) needless to say, they are considered junk there.
Because I don't have a classic name Italian road bike to talk about, my bikes generate little to no interest in this forum, and yes, some of the "purists" have called them trash (even though the KHS has a lugged steel TRIPLE Butted TANGE frame ...)
That said, I still learn something from the forums. Even with my "junk" bikes, some of the concerns are the same.
What I DESPISE are bike snobs of ALL disciplines of cycling; especially those who claim that if you don't ride a bike costing a minimum of $1,000 or more, you have trash/junk and wasted your money. THOSE "people" drive riders away. If all they can afford is a Walmart bike, so be it. It is better to ride and be encouraged than to be told you ride a piece of sh*t and that you are worthless.

Velognome 

And my gene's are nearly 3 times as old.....classic

RobE30

Very true. There are quite a few new bikes that embrace the c&v heritage.

cbresciani

Here is my take, I think vintage would be anything from the late 70's and earlier. Classic could be any year in my opinion with a straight or sloped top tube.

Chombi

Like I said, "Neo-classic". Same way the term is used on "Neo-classical" Architecture.

RobE30

I hadn't taken the time to read the whole thread....

CroMo Mike 

The whole thing is actually self regulating. Members post discussion or pictures of what they think is classic and vintage. If other members aren't impressed, there is probably no further discussion. The OP and his post fade away. Or the admins feel it belongs in another category and move it out of C&V.

bici_mania

Brilliant and concise.

That is pretty much how I see bikes.


Being laid off has cramped my bike habit but bikes still find their way into my garage though they are not always mine. Generally they are 20+ years old but those that are newer usually get C&V tweaks. I try to add some kind of C&V touch to every bike, no matter how new. I learn much from browsing these discussions and over time, as a result have developed a far deeper appreciation for C&V bikes that gets passed on to my children and anyone around me who will listen.

On the other hand, for me new technology in cycling stopped somewhere in the mid-nineties. Sloping top tubes, carbon fiber, 11-speeds, electric shifting, integrated headsets, or external bearings; these things can not ever fit into C&V in my mind, regardless of age. If/When I get bikes that have any of these features, they get passed on to others.

bici_mania

Holy smokes...any more pictures of that?