robertj298 

Seems like innovation paired with cost made the 1980s great.

thinktubes 

For racing, I would go with 90s steel - Max, EL OS, 853, etc....

bikemig 

The 80s were a great time for top end touring bikes. I like 70s era racing bikes a lot because they typically have clearance for decent volume tires.

cycleheimer

The 1980s, as mentioned, had the innovations at a nice price. You can find beautifully finished lugged frames that can handle 700c wheel sets. I always liked the Japanese bikes, which IMHO hit their high point in the mid-80s. As far as shifting is concerned, SunTour made some really nice components back then. SunTour bar cons do the trick for me. Miyata and Fuji are my favorites. Some of the steel bikes from the '90s function well also. The appearance of many of the frames I've seen seemed to look as though they suffered from cost cutting. My '91 Fuji isn't too bad, but has a unicrown fork. Production was also shifted to Taiwan. French Motobecanes from the late 1970s are also outstanding.

sd5782 

I’ve asked myself the same question and came to the conclusion that the 80s may be the best trade off of new manufacturing techniques and product ideas combined with the still available old world skilled labor.

I’ve come to this from other interests; motorcycles, and spring powered pellet guns.

In the case of motorcycles and reflecting my age perspective of 64 years old, the 60s saw lots of various ideas on everything, even 2 stroke engines and various engine configurations. The 70s saw some of these ideas falling by the wayside, while others got more refined. The 80s pretty much sorted things out, and there was lots less interesting variety but the UJM ie; universal Japanese motorcycle was king.

With my spring guns, the same happened, except in the 80s there was still blued steel and wood and very little plastic. An aside here that goes into cars and motorcycles and spring guns was spring steel alloys of the 80s. Engines could turn some more modern rpm. Pellet rifles shot over 800fps. We still had old guys in the factories though knowing how to put craftsmanship into these items.

Steel alloy development surely played a great part of the sorting out of quality bikes as the 60s turned into the 70s. My 64 Frejus doesn’t even have a steel alloy sticker. By the 70s and surely the 80s, it was bragging rights.

I am new into this hobby, but I would bet that the more traditional purists appreciated the 50s, 60s, and 70s for the variety of “ideas”, even though probably 75% of them fell by the wayside too. So yes, from a purely analytical viewpoint, the 80s were perhaps the most functionally best for steel bikes in general, but that eliminates the devilish fun of all the dead ends and occasional successes we encounter with some older stuff.

randallr

The advent of air-hardening steels (like Reynolds 853) allowed improvements in frame design and construction not seen in the Reynolds 531 era.

himespau 

The 90's had some lighter, fancier steel, but also started to move to Tig welding away from the more attractive (to my eyes) lugs and the tire clearance decreased (a shame as wider tires are again en vogue).

Charles Wahl

A contrarian view: For class, my personal opinion is that the 1950s was the high water mark for steel frame beauty, subtlety and execution; no contest, in my mind.

70sSanO

For mountain bikes, the 90’s were the decade.

John

T-Mar

Accles & Pollock was marketing air hardened bicycle tubing as early as the 1930s. Many of the British builders preferred it over Reynolds 531 as the steel became stronger after brazing, whereas Reynolds 531 became weaker.

nlerner

Heliochromatic hubs
chainstay mounted brakes (on MTBs)
fade paint jobs
the move from sport touring geometry to crit geometry as dominant
no thanks

SurferRosa

'79-'81 is my sweet: recessed brakes, 126mm rears, bottle bosses, shifter bosses, top tube cable guides.

79pmooney

I saw a Miyata 912 on a bike rake this morning. Beautiful frame. Long point lugs, clean work, business-like squared off dropouts, all the markers of say 1985, perhaps a year or two later. I think the equipment was original so I could have looked more and dated it but I didn't want to attract a lot of attention to it. It looked a lot like the Univega Competition I had briefly a few years ago but I bet this one had lighter, more fun tubing.

I had a Miyata 612 for many years that I rode the heck out of. That bike was a poor fit and just OK serving what i used it for, but ... the build and alignment quality and freedom from defects was way up there.

79pmooney

+1 Cable housing guides on top of the top tube. No scraping paint when you pick up the bike the top tube or hang it by the same. Also, full length housings have half the entry/exit points and half the issues. Rear brakes become less effective; nicely in line with how useless they are for big-time stopping. (My first custom of 2008 got guides that could take stops so I could change my mind. By my second, the builder knew I was never going to change and put in simple housing guides.)

canklecat

Yeah, in some respects. The 1980s was a great decade for price/performance. Especially in mid-tier road bikes. A lot of value for around $500.

While I enjoy my 1990s and 201x era carbon fiber bikes, they aren't really any better than my 1989 Ironman for my purposes. We don't have any real mountains here so the lighter weight isn't a real factor, and I'm not strong enough to consistently take advantage of the lighter weight carbon fiber bikes anyway.

While I was sick for a few weeks this spring I spent some time examining my ride data on Strava over the past few years, trying to psych myself up to finish some modifications to my Ironman, and to finish overhauling my 1993 Trek 5900.

I spent most of 2017-2018 riding my Ironman; most of 2019 riding a Trek 5900 OCLV; and the Ironman again for the first half of 2020, then a very lightweight Diamondback Podium (2014 model, I think) the second half of 2020 and most of this year.

There was no consistent pattern that could be attributed to the bike. On good days I was averaging 17 mph over my usual 20-50 mile routes with lots of roller coaster terrain -- plenty of short, steep hills (often double digit grades), mostly semi-flattish. Far from fast, but not bad for me at my age (60s). The local pro and amateur teams ride the same route and average 20+ mph as a group, including pacelines and drafting, and they're much younger. My segment PRs are pretty good for my age group, comparable to other guys my age, although I've lost the few KOMs and most of the top tens I had a few years ago as more younger, stronger riders logged the same segments. No big deal, a guy my age should never have a KOM on any segment if enough people are riding it.

What surprised me was that many of my faster rides and fastest Strava segments are still from rides on my 1989 Ironman, which is mostly stock. At the time it was nearly 100% stock, including the original wheelset which wasn't even that great -- excellent lightweight Araya CTL-370 rims, but middling quality Suntour GPX hubs. The Ironmen with Wolber rims and Shimano 600 hubs were better wheelsets. The Araya CTL-370 rim was a little lighter than the Wolber Super Champion Alpine, but the Shimano hubs were buttery smooth compared with the Suntour. Switching to semi-aero Mavic wheels with racing tires didn't really make any difference, probably because my body is the biggest source of aero drag -- due to old neck, back and shoulder injuries I can't stay tucked for more than a few minutes at a time, and can't use aero bars longer than a minute at a time.

I saw no clear advantages to my '93 Trek 5900, or later model Diamondback Podium, both much fancier, lighter bikes with higher specs. On a good day the nearly stock Ironman, which was only a mid-tier bike in the 1980s, was as fast over distance and shorter segments.

When I was a young feller in the 1970s-early '80s, riding a 30 lb Motobecane with hi-ten frame and fork, craving a better bike, I'd have lusted for the 1980s Ironmen if they'd been available. Those were much better buys than comparably spec'd 1970s mid to upper tier bikes.

On the plus side, now I know I wouldn't get any benefit from a mid or upper tier carbon fiber bike. So I'll have saved a few thousand dollars by upgrading a more affordable older steel bike, or even older carbon fiber bike.

So I've changed my plans for modding my Ironman to just replacing the downtube shifters with affordable MicroShift 7-speed brifters that I already have. While I like downtube shifters just fine and usually have no problems with them, there are occasions -- heavy crosswinds or gravel rides -- when I'd rather keep both hands on the bar while shifting. Other than that, the Ironman doesn't really need anything. And after swiping the MicroShift setup that was on the Trek 5900 for awhile, I'll put some Dura Ace 8-speed stuff on the Trek 5900, which will be closer to that bike's original configuration (although it originally had downtube shifters and, if memory serves, Mavic's early version of the Zap "auto-shifting" drivetrain -- not sure because I can't find any specifics in the available PDFs of Trek's service manuals).

Biketiger

I think so. If you're talking about building the best light weight steel racers - absolutely. Eddy Merckx started building frames in the early 80's. I have a De Rosa brochure from 1986 and the cover says, 'A Heritage of Quality.' The inside has photos of Ugo with his sons with the caption, 'The Pride of Craftsmen." After decades of dominance, by the mid 80's steel was on its way out as aluminum and carbon frames were taking over. De Rosa was showcasing the art of traditional steel frame making as factory frames were being churned out with ever greater numbers. Look at the changes in production at Trek in the 1980s. Japanese steel frame makers - Miyata, Shogun, Univega, - all major players in the 1980s. Italian racing machines were hugely popular - Bianchi, Cinelli, Pinarello imported into the US and available thru mail order. Also, think of all the great custom steel builders who were prominent then too like Richard Sachs, Dave Moulton. 1980s was the pinnacle of light weight steel. By the 90's high frame materials shifted away from steel to aluminum and carbon fiber. It's also important to consider the types of bikes people were riding. In the 1980's road bikes were all the rage. I read on Bicycle Retailer news site that in the 1990's, 90% of the bikes sold in the US were mountain bikes.

philbob57

OTOH, the '80s were the age of square frames that leave me hanging out over the front hub. SIS shifting for 6 and 7 speeds is more for riders with low skills than for skilled riders. Cassettes weren't a compelling upgrade for 6/7 speeds for most riders. The first C'dales rode like trucks. The long point lugs look like lugs for low-skilled builders, as opposed to Nervex and builder-modified ornate lugs. Reynolds 531 was great, but 753 required special skills and couldn't be cold-set (although some people did it successfully). Tange 1 and 2 and Ishiwata 022 and 024 or even 531 frames from Trek or Spesh, or Miyata, Univega, Fuji, Shogun, Sekai, internally lugged French frames - none of them would entice me away from my 21" (ST) x 22" 531 English frame with an Ultra-6 freewheel until I got a lot older and could benefit from indexed DT shifting. (I upgraded a couple of years ago at 74 or 75; I woudl have needed that earlier if it weren't so flat here).

Even beautifully fillet-brazed frames don't look as good to me as long-point lugs, much less ornate ones, but the new steels that were developed for TIG-welding resulted in lighter, stronger, cheaper frames, no?

I see the '80s providing incremental improvement on the way to greater things rather than as a culmination. Of course, that can be said of most other decades, too. That's for bikes. In photography and audio, the '80s might have seen some improvement in isolated areas but basically so lower quality reproduction at higher cost....

iab

If the 80s are indeed the pinnacle of steel bikes, they are most definitely wasted on the likes in this forum. So in reality, buy/ride what you like. But using a Stradivarius to play Mary Had A Little Lamb is embarrassing.

genejockey 

Must be, because all my steel bikes - 5/8 of my collection - are from then. Two Lotuses in Tange Champion#2, one Schwinn Circuit in Columbus SP, one Battaglin in MAX, and a Ritchey Road Logic in whatever Ol' Tom was using in 1992.

Okay, sure, 1992 isn't the 80s. Shut up.

Biketiger

Speak for yourself

icemilkcoffee 

I would go as far as to say 1987 was the watershed year. That was the last year that all the large manufacturers all had a full line of steel road bikes. After that Trek, Schwinn, Specialized, etc, etc , all quickly migrated to aluminum and then carbon fiber bikes. So 1987 was the last hurrah for mass produced, lugged frame high performance steel bike.
1987 was also the year when a lot of the major brands dabbled in lopro/ funny bikes and Terry style bikes , almost all made from steel. So that makes it a doubly interesting year!

SurferRosa

What about a Strat?

Lazyass

I was watching a video from 1989 and there was a segment from Jack Taylor in his shop. He was complaining about the trend of then-modern bikes being made with brake bridges so close to the tires and geometry so tight that you couldn't fit mudguards on them anymore.

Germany_chris

I think the 2000’s are the best, you can have it served any way you want, want lugs, thru axles, and a tapered head tube you can do that. Want a remake of a 60’s race bike, no problem dream of 40’s France it’s a phone call.

iab

So, it's not about the guitar?