Retro?

avalon
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 10:39 pm
Location: south australia

Retro?

Postby avalon » Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:41 pm

How old does your bike have to be to be classed as retro? Or is it not the age, but the components you choose to use on it?

User avatar
jonbays
Posts: 417
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 8:14 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Retro?

Postby jonbays » Wed Feb 02, 2011 8:20 pm

Everyone will have a differing idea about what retro is but for me it's the lttle things like having downtube shifters, non areo brakes, 12 or less gears, steel frame and built in the 1960-1980's

User avatar
hartleymartin
Posts: 5153
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:56 pm
Location: Fairfield, NSW

Re: Retro?

Postby hartleymartin » Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:46 am

"Vintage/Retro" is typically anything up to the mid-1980's. Most would say pre-1987.

However, Retro items can also be bicycles that have been built in the style of those older designs.

My 1982 Raleigh Royal, 1975 and 1977 Raleigh Twentys would all be vintage. My early 90's MTB frame might or might not make the cut.
Martin Christopher Hartley

http://raleightwenty.webs.com - the top web resource for the Raleigh Twenty

User avatar
jet-ski
Posts: 1404
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 5:51 pm
Location: Perth WA
Contact:

Re: Retro?

Postby jet-ski » Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:53 am

The standard for 'vintage' cars is 25 years or older. Seems logical to apply to bicycles as well.
Bike Friday New World Tourist, Schwinn Le Tour Sport, Giant TCR, Giant STP2, 9:zero:7 fattie

Torana68
Posts: 1518
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 11:40 am
Location: NSW/ACT
Contact:

Re: Retro?

Postby Torana68 » Thu Feb 03, 2011 8:59 am

jet-ski wrote:The standard for 'vintage' cars is 25 years or older. Seems logical to apply to bicycles as well.
agreed but cycle people seem to think the world standard for cars and motorcycles doesnt (or shouldnt) apply to bicycles. Vintage to some is more than ten years old, which to me is dull. Retro can be brand new so I dont really rate it (see retro toasters and kettles etc)

User avatar
jet-ski
Posts: 1404
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 5:51 pm
Location: Perth WA
Contact:

Re: Retro?

Postby jet-ski » Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:02 am

Yeah true, I hate new retro... :P

I will stick to my vintage definition. ;)
Bike Friday New World Tourist, Schwinn Le Tour Sport, Giant TCR, Giant STP2, 9:zero:7 fattie

User avatar
MichaelB
Posts: 14775
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:29 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Retro?

Postby MichaelB » Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:38 am

jet-ski wrote:The standard for 'vintage' cars is 25 years or older. Seems logical to apply to bicycles as well.

From wiki as far as "cars & motorbikes" go

A vintage car is commonly defined as a car built between the start of 1919 and the end of 1930 known as the "Vintage era". There is little debate about the start date of the vintage period—the end of World War I is a nicely defined marker there—but the end date is a matter of a little more debate

So realistically, you would have to apply similar timeframes to bicycles, although there is little agreement on this.

25 years could be a "retro" limit, but not vintage imho.

User avatar
leighthebee
Posts: 441
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: Retro?

Postby leighthebee » Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:25 pm

As for cars. "vintage" to 1930, after that to 30 years previous from today is "classic"

User avatar
hartleymartin
Posts: 5153
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:56 pm
Location: Fairfield, NSW

Re: Retro?

Postby hartleymartin » Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:12 pm

I agree, that it is probably better to use the term "classic" to describe bicycles pre-1987.
Martin Christopher Hartley

http://raleightwenty.webs.com - the top web resource for the Raleigh Twenty

User avatar
spirito
Posts: 1393
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 2:03 pm

Re: Retro?

Postby spirito » Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:33 pm

hartleymartin wrote:I agree, that it is probably better to use the term "classic" to describe bicycles pre-1987.
Me too.

The term retro is one I find rather irksome.
Cranky Jim wrote: God did not invent gears. Men invented gears ... because we are not gods.

User avatar
brentono
Posts: 3698
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:33 pm
Location: Perth DubyaEh.

Re: Retro?

Postby brentono » Thu Feb 03, 2011 5:12 pm

Déjà vu :lol:

"vintage"/retro/classic for bikes, from a fair bit of my research "could" be pre-STI.
Hartleymartin's "Most would say pre-1987" is fairly well put.
(there's doesn't seem to be any concensus, so we can put this one with helmets/road-rules :roll: )

Agree with Jetski and Torana68 on vehicles :|
The standard for 'vintage' cars is 25 years or older
(at least here in W.A.)
:mrgreen:
Lone Rider- I rode on the long, dark road... before I danced under the lights.

avalon
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 10:39 pm
Location: south australia

Re: Retro?

Postby avalon » Thu Feb 03, 2011 5:29 pm

So, I take it my 1980 Mercian frame hanging in the shed qualifies me to join the retro/vintage/classic club. I also have a mid 90s 531 Claud Butler with down tube gear levers. Where does that fit in the scheme of things?

User avatar
Semar
Posts: 3544
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 6:14 pm
Location: Goulburn Valley

Re: Retro?

Postby Semar » Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:34 pm

Too old to be a trade in. Too good to throw away. (Though that's debatable with some of the stuff seen here abouts.) :lol:
It’s more like our thoughts are thinking us than we are thinking them.

Torana68
Posts: 1518
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 11:40 am
Location: NSW/ACT
Contact:

Re: Retro?

Postby Torana68 » Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:42 pm

avalon wrote:. I also have a mid 90s 531 Claud Butler with down tube gear levers. Where does that fit in the scheme of things?
"modern classic" but that should NOT include Kmart specials or other dross......nor badge engineered Asian frames with wel known makers names stuck on them

User avatar
hartleymartin
Posts: 5153
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:56 pm
Location: Fairfield, NSW

Re: Retro?

Postby hartleymartin » Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:33 pm

Quality Japanese-made frames would pass as classic, but the cheap-and-nasty chinese-built 10-speeds which were re-badged by big brands from the late 1980's onwards would not.

The 90's Claud Butler would probably pass as "Classic", as it was built in the same style as the earlier classic frames. It is hard to put one hard-and-fast rule on this, as some bicycles do need to be judged on their own history.
Martin Christopher Hartley

http://raleightwenty.webs.com - the top web resource for the Raleigh Twenty

User avatar
WyvernRH
Posts: 3179
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:41 pm
Location: Newcastle NSW

Re: Retro?

Postby WyvernRH » Fri Feb 04, 2011 9:13 am

hartleymartin wrote:The 90's Claud Butler would probably pass as "Classic", as it was built in the same style as the earlier classic frames. It is hard to put one hard-and-fast rule on this, as some bicycles do need to be judged on their own history.
Hmm I think the 90's Claud would really be 'Retro styled' rather than 'Classic' .
By the 90's the only thing that would be Claud Butler on that bike would be the transfers and they would have been printed in China. The name was by then onto its 4th or 5th owner and was part of a large corporation which brought bikes in from Taiwan, stuck whichever of their various trade names suited on the frame and marketed them. I think by the 90's all the assembly, painting and decalling was done abroad and the bikes all came finished in boxes off the boat.
This is not to sat that it is not a good bike, just that IMHO it cannot (yet) be classed as a 'Classic' alongside Clauds manufactured by Claud Butler or Holdsworth upto the late 70s -early 80's.
Mind you, Hardliners would say that any Claud that was built after Holdsworth bought Claud Butler's name and logos in 1958 is a 'Label Job' :wink:
Cheers
Richard

Torana68
Posts: 1518
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 11:40 am
Location: NSW/ACT
Contact:

Re: Retro?

Postby Torana68 » Fri Feb 04, 2011 10:11 am

[[/quote]quote="hartleymartin"]The 90's Claud Butler would probably pass as "Classic", as it was built in the same style as the earlier classic frames. It is hard to put one hard-and-fast rule on this, as some bicycles do need to be judged on their own history.[/quote]

hard and fast rules are pretty easy, decals that would indicate a locally made frame by a well known builder that are actually made in a big factory in another country with no connection tho the original builder are not classic anything unless they earn the status. Just cause its a "retro" look doesnt mean anything either as I said before see retro kettles and toasters... just dross .. Japanese classics? few and far between except in Japan, no real history here or anywhere but there, they made some good ones but "Classic" might be a bit of a stretch.

User avatar
brentono
Posts: 3698
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:33 pm
Location: Perth DubyaEh.

Re: Retro?

Postby brentono » Fri Feb 04, 2011 5:11 pm

Torana68 wrote: Japanese classics? few and far between except in Japan, no real history here or anywhere but there, they made some good ones but "Classic" might be a bit of a stretch.
Nagasawa would be a good frame to look for.
There is quite a depth of very good frames, track for Keirin, but there are road frames.
From the mid-70's have been great "Classic" frames built.
Many to put Australian/English/EU frame builders to shame.

You can see some example here-
http://njs-keirin.blogspot.com/
There are many legends coloring Nagasawa's career. After graduating from college,
he went to Italy in 1970.
Being a trainee at Pogliaghi, then spent the next six years at De Rosa learning from "the old man."
One day Ugo De Rosa ordered young Nagasawa to build a frame for Eddy Merckx.
Nagasawa asked how? De Rosa replied "like an offering to the God."
Unfortunately, we do not know if this anecdote is the fact or not.
Nevertheless, Nagasawa does not like to talk about the past;
he is still an active, top-ranked frame builder to this day.
:mrgreen:
Lone Rider- I rode on the long, dark road... before I danced under the lights.

User avatar
sturmey archer
Posts: 237
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 8:14 pm
Location: Melbourne

Re: Retro?

Postby sturmey archer » Fri Feb 04, 2011 5:52 pm

If I actually think about it, 'Retro' summons up an image of modern plastic (in a bad way) reproduction of a period item.
A specific example would be a cheap plastic reproduction of a classic bakelite mantle radio using a tinny 1" speaker and with LEDs to light the dial.
Image
Hmm. I think I'll just call my old bikes 'old bikes' now....
1.370" x 24 tpi - what sort of stupid standard is that?

avalon
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 10:39 pm
Location: south australia

Re: Retro?

Postby avalon » Fri Feb 04, 2011 6:42 pm

WyvernRH wrote:
hartleymartin wrote:The 90's Claud Butler would probably pass as "Classic", as it was built in the same style as the earlier classic frames. It is hard to put one hard-and-fast rule on this, as some bicycles do need to be judged on their own history.
Hmm I think the 90's Claud would really be 'Retro styled' rather than 'Classic' .
By the 90's the only thing that would be Claud Butler on that bike would be the transfers and they would have been printed in China. The name was by then onto its 4th or 5th owner and was part of a large corporation which brought bikes in from Taiwan, stuck whichever of their various trade names suited on the frame and marketed them. I think by the 90's all the assembly, painting and decalling was done abroad and the bikes all came finished in boxes off the boat.
This is not to sat that it is not a good bike, just that IMHO it cannot (yet) be classed as a 'Classic' alongside Clauds manufactured by Claud Butler or Holdsworth upto the late 70s -early 80's.
Mind you, Hardliners would say that any Claud that was built after Holdsworth bought Claud Butler's name and logos in 1958 is a 'Label Job' :wink:
Cheers
Richard
It actually says on the frame "Handbuilt in England" and is built using Reynolds 531 competition tubing. I know shortly after I bought it the steel frames were replaced with alloy ones which were not made in England. I also have a Claud Butler Black Diamond touring bike (Reynolds 531 ST tubing) which were built for St john Street Cycles (Thorn Cycles) in the 90s.

User avatar
il padrone
Posts: 22931
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Retro?

Postby il padrone » Fri Feb 04, 2011 7:58 pm

My rather classy Thorn Raven Nomad has a sticker on it that says "handbuilt in Taiwan" 8)


According to Thorn they get it made by a framebuilder that does some pretty classy bikes for various prestige USA manufacturers (who probably label theirs "designed in USA"). Thorn specify the design and include such special bits as having all the frame blow-holes filled after brazing is completed - to prevent water ingress that (long term) may lead to rust.
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

User avatar
WyvernRH
Posts: 3179
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:41 pm
Location: Newcastle NSW

Re: Retro?

Postby WyvernRH » Fri Feb 04, 2011 9:54 pm

avalon wrote: It actually says on the frame "Handbuilt in England" and is built using Reynolds 531 competition tubing. I know shortly after I bought it the steel frames were replaced with alloy ones which were not made in England. I also have a Claud Butler Black Diamond touring bike (Reynolds 531 ST tubing) which were built for St john Street Cycles (Thorn Cycles) in the 90s.
Yes well, not meaning to run the bike down but... for 'Hand Built' read 'Hand Assembled' and really anyone can get Reynold tubing (even me...). St Johns are no longer the paragon they used to be in the 80's. Ask all the frame builders they laid off when thy offshored most of their frame building (for good commercial reasons).
Cheers
Richard

User avatar
brentono
Posts: 3698
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:33 pm
Location: Perth DubyaEh.

Re: Retro?

Postby brentono » Mon Feb 07, 2011 12:49 pm

WyvernRH wrote:
Yes well, not meaning to run the bike down but... for 'Hand Built' read 'Hand Assembled'
Cheers
Richard
Richard,
You twiged my memory, was 'Hand Assembling' semi-racers, in the 70's, Aussie brands,
out of Asia, as fast as we could at $2 odd a pop (could have been $3, it's fuzzy).
The punters, thought they were the good-old aussie namesakes, of the period.
Feeling good, could do 4 or 5 in an hour, which was flying, and you could keep going for about 30 odd.
Good money in those days.
:mrgreen:
Lone Rider- I rode on the long, dark road... before I danced under the lights.

User avatar
Kid_Carbine
Posts: 1300
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:35 pm
Location: Southern Tablelands N.S.W.

Re: Retro?

Postby Kid_Carbine » Mon Feb 07, 2011 5:51 pm

jet-ski wrote:The standard for 'vintage' cars is 25 years or older. Seems logical to apply to bicycles as well.
I don't know who told you that but they were seriously misinformed.

The international standard for cars is
Veteran, .... up to the 31st of December 1918
Vintage, .... from the 1st of January 1919 untill the 31st of December 1930.

Anything after that is post Vintage despite what the ill informed say. [including the registration authorities]

The general rule was 30 years, but that misses the mark by 50 years too.

Using the term 'Classic' to define a time period seriously demeans the word. Think of what it means. Something with class.

There are still plenty of bikes out there that might fill this description but what about all those department store bikes, those mass produced low class names or models that we see thrown out in the hard rubbish. Sadly, we don't see this stuff thrown out often enough & they seem to have survived in large numbers.

By all means include the rubbish bikes in a category of some sort, but please please please, .... don't call them "Classic"
Carbine & SJH cycles, & Quicksilver BMX
Now that's AUSTRALIAN to the core.

User avatar
il padrone
Posts: 22931
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Retro?

Postby il padrone » Mon Feb 07, 2011 10:03 pm

Ooh yeah!!

Amongst a search on ebay for 'classic bicycles' is this "classic" - a Huffy FGS!

Image
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users