A sub-forum for brifters?
 

Are we being punked?

My bikes like the attention.

1990's era bikes are too new for the vintage section and no one in the road section cares about them. A lot of members weren't even born then.

I think it's funny that people get concerned with them making a forum they're not interested in. Seriously, does any one person who isn't a mod actually read more than 20% of the forums on here?

I'm a mod and I only read about 5 forums. The only reason I read General is that it used to be a quiet little backwater at the bottom of the forum and I got it promoted to the top. So I feel somewhat responsible for the garbage that people post in here. Like this thread. The reason I wanted General here is to be above A&S, and it worked to some degree. I actually wanted A&S to be way down at the bottom, but got overruled on that.
But a lot of people just scroll right past it and go to road, whereas they used to stop in and make trouble.

Anyway, my idea for the new forum was to call it, "Crusty not Classic"

Should be "Grunge Era Bikes"

or "Yard Sale Treasures" ?

Worst worded poll ever. Also, it's pretty obvious now that the subforum is attracting interest, so the ship has sailed.

Yeah, your 2001 Trek 2200 doesn't belong in C&V and the people in road will just tell you to n+1

In some ways, this is a subforum dedicated to a glorious evolutionary dead-end. The art of the steel racing frame was being perfected just as it was becoming largely obsolete. I think a lot of these bikes are classics, just not old enough to be appreciated as such.

I chimed in on one of the other threads, but I don't really get the need to distinguish 90's/early brifters. I had a 1995 raleigh with 8 speed 105 from 2014-2018 and aside from having a quill stem was exactly the same as the 2018 allez with Claris components I currently use for road, and even the 11 speed CX bike I race on. I just don't see what's special about them, especially since 8-10 speed (until the most recent Tiagra) are basically interchangeable.

It is too much overlap. A 1998 9sp road bike can be 96% the same as a 2015 9sp road bike and 92% the same as a 2015 11sp road bike.
I have been vocal, in threads and PMs, and the main reason is the forced moving of threads into that forum. Especially when the threads arent even applicable to that forum like the very popular retro roadies thread. Thats c&v frames with STIs, many of which are 10 and 11sp. Thats neither the frame period or STI period the forum is for.

An 8 or 9sp road bike doesnt need a new forum- 8sp and 9sp STI road bikes are currently for sale and a very popular option due to cost and value.

Interest has partly been force created due to threads being moved there even if the OP didnt want them.
This practice is rarely done elsewhere, its why there are mechanical discussions in general, c&v, road, etc. Its why there are lights and gps discussions in general, road, etc. Its why there are MTB threads in general and c&v. I could continue, but hopefully you are able to recognize the inconsistent application of moving threads.

And while the forum is attracting interest, that doesnt mean the same level of interest wouldnt exist if the forum werent around- the interest would just be in road and c&v. Interest being further subdivided doesnt equal increased interest.

This new forum was apparently due to one c&v person asking for it. Take time and read thru threads about the new forum- they are overwhelmingly filled with 'why' and 'not needed' type comments.

I am not concerned, I find it humorous.

Then don't post there. Pretty easy.

Just read the Colnago thread in that forum.. which was about a frameset purchase, on which the buyer plans to install SR 11speed. :(

Just the word grates on me. It’s like Bennifer.

Theres Ergo’s and STI’s. No such thing as a brifter.

Well, you've certainly never been shy about telling the mods how to do their jobs, you seem rather compulsive about it. I've looked at those threads, mostly it seems like people who aren't interested in these types of bikes, dislike of the word brifter, quibbles about the number of gears, etc. I love these kinds of bikes and I'm glad there's a clear place for discussion of them. I will probably read more than post there because I'm really learning a lot about them.

TBH, I've been interested in this kind of bike for a few years and now have two. I would never have found the threads about them in C&V because it would require so much wading through types of bikes I have no interest in, and they clearly aren't considered classics yet. As to Road Cycling, I don't spend time there because it is so focused on newer equipment and racing that I feel like I don't speak the language, and learning it doesn't interest me. Again, too much wading to find the little bit of content that I'd be interested in.

So, yes it's a niche subforum. I don't expect it to be massively popular, and I don't think its establishment .requires a vote, especially from people who think this is kind of a joke subcategory. I honestly don't care what they think about this subforum and I don't see why anyone should. We already know they're not interested in those things they're not interested in.

You have probably compiled about a book's worth of advice to the mods, will you be publishing it any time soon?

If the mods are entertaining ideas for new forums, how about "Tubeless, Disc-braked Road Bikes with Electronic Shifting" ;)

I havent been shy with my suggestions and you havent been shy with your passive aggressive as well as outright aggressive snark.

In threads discussing the new subforum which is on a message board, I have stated my opinions. Ive done that since this is literally a place to state opinions. That seems quite reasonable.
The forum was created because a user suggested it. Since a user's opinion created the subforum, its reasonable to think that another user's opinion will be heard. Go snark about the user who suggested the forum since they are 'telling the mods how to do their jobs' if you want to be consistent.

1- I am not telling the mods how to do their jobs.
2- I fully recognize mods volunteer and the job is thankless.
3- I have been vocal about not forcing threads into the subforum since that practice is so very rarely done in all other forums. That is user feedback.
4- Do you think users should just stay quiet and never discuss changes to a system that benefits from the users actually using the system? This is a symbiotic relationship- message board and users. Feedback from both sides helps the relationship continue.

Its great that you have recently discovered bikes with integrated shifting into the brake levers. If you post questions on the road forum about your older bike/older tech, you will have answers. I know this because people do it all the time. If you post questions on the c&v forum about your newer bike/newer tech, you will have answers. I know this because people do it all the time.
Im not sure what language you think you need to speak to post about your bike on the road forum- its the same language you will need to post about your bike on any of the forums.


You and mods seem to think the circle of c&v and circle of road dont/cant intersect so another forum was needed to bridge the gap. Reality is that the circles are a pretty significant overlapping Venn Diagram.

This is a good idea.

Interesting topic, especially in light of MTBR’s (for those who have older mtbs) Vintage, Retro, & Classic subforum. It used to be quite lively but now that place is a veritable ghost town.

Most vintage and collectible anything is generational. Stuff people had or wanted when they were younger and are reaching back to get as they age. Bikes transcend that a bit, but the older stuff I like is not what my kids like. I suspect BF C&V will not fall off a cliff like MTBR VR&C since it is not limited to a particular type of older bike.

I get the impression that BF C&V is a bit like Eroica. I guess my bikes are old enough, but I’ve never felt that they meet the correct C&V image so I don’t post there often. I understand that those who have post 1990(?), 2000(?) bikes wouldn’t feel a part of that community.

I have no idea if there is enough interest in newer old bikes to warrant a new subforum. Personally it would make more sense to expand C&V to embrace a rolling cut-off for classic bikes, maybe there is already one, but since I was never really that involved in C&V I have no clue. But time always has a way of sorting these things out.

John

Language is not an ant stuck in amber and portmanteaus are one way is which the language keeps changing and maintains it fluidity.

Your other examples are brand specific and the word brifter is not. It has evolved to become an actual word.

Noo no no non...

The next sub forum should be for older 26" mtb's. I am sooo tired of having to combat the crap one member in particuar, who doesn't own or ride one, posts whenever they are mentioned in the main mtb subforum because they aren't part of the modern lexicon of FS wide range geared, upright geometry of today. Turns so many conversations into mud fights.

I have no idea whether such a sub forum would get traffic but they (26rs) are still very widely used. I've always wondered how many lurkers don't post about them because they don't want the shade of that one persons "buy another bike", "POS", "good to look at but not to ride" baloney.

Which apparently is a thing again, if you believe the tabloid news.

They (Tabloids) seem to be as accurate as any legit source these days so I'm going with it.

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...7a4c41981b.jpg