- Feedback
- View
English threads and BSA are one and the same - its what the world adopted. Square tapers were the same width with just deeper or shallower taper, usable but not advisable. Threadless was available for 1 inch and 1 1/8 with just a change of the top of the headset to 'convert' - 68/73 was all interchangeable with cup & cone, frame adaptors for BMX BB's, spacers for 1 1/4 head tubes to bring it back to a usable size, press fit bearings were available from other industries so it could all be easily sorted and still can with whats available around you.
The tapered steerer was for carbon, it was needed for carbon - it can not be seen in the same way as aluminium or steel.
You also have to remember that in order to make money you have to have a dominant product or standard that you can sell or license to others, once you have that you are King. Until someone else brings something else out.
The retrobike thing is very green and environmental and certain things work for a reason. Cycling as a business isnt quite so green and is there to make its shareholders money. They cant make money out of old bicycles, they have to sell you new, they make everything a competition, everything has to give you an edge over the guy next to you. You need to be insecure about what you have because will it be good enough?
People often ask why the 1997 cut-off with Retrobike. Its been pointed out by many as the point where the accountants stepped in. They said 'you need to make money', thats when the 'golden era' possibly ended but I dont subscribe to that. I think its when we as individuals stop chasing that edge - that could be today or tomorrow, or in my case, 2006 when the then 'new' bike I bought was compared directly to a much older one and it failed miserably out on the trails. The old bike stayed and the new bike went on to some other, someone still looking for that edge.
So dont see retrobikes as obsolete, they dont require 'technology' to reduce their emissions or airbags or safety systems. They are very recyclable and can be made to be re-used for decades upon decades. Every journey they make is a plus point for personal health and the environment
The tapered steerer was for carbon, it was needed for carbon - it can not be seen in the same way as aluminium or steel.
You also have to remember that in order to make money you have to have a dominant product or standard that you can sell or license to others, once you have that you are King. Until someone else brings something else out.
The retrobike thing is very green and environmental and certain things work for a reason. Cycling as a business isnt quite so green and is there to make its shareholders money. They cant make money out of old bicycles, they have to sell you new, they make everything a competition, everything has to give you an edge over the guy next to you. You need to be insecure about what you have because will it be good enough?
People often ask why the 1997 cut-off with Retrobike. Its been pointed out by many as the point where the accountants stepped in. They said 'you need to make money', thats when the 'golden era' possibly ended but I dont subscribe to that. I think its when we as individuals stop chasing that edge - that could be today or tomorrow, or in my case, 2006 when the then 'new' bike I bought was compared directly to a much older one and it failed miserably out on the trails. The old bike stayed and the new bike went on to some other, someone still looking for that edge.
So dont see retrobikes as obsolete, they dont require 'technology' to reduce their emissions or airbags or safety systems. They are very recyclable and can be made to be re-used for decades upon decades. Every journey they make is a plus point for personal health and the environment