Readers Bike Date Split

john

The Guv’nor
Admin
Retrobike Rider
Feedback
View
All,

due to popular demand we have decided to have two date based categories for Reader's Bikes

Reader's Bikes --> 1997

This is for all bikes built up to (and including) 1997

Reader's Bikes 1998 -->

This is for all bikes built 1998 onwards



This isn't intended to be a retro / non-retro split. It's a simple date based split. To be honest people's definition of retro varies so wildly it's impossible :LOL:

Anyhow hope everybody is cool with this....
 
Just to add this is for new entries to reader's bikes only, don't intend to go back through all the posts moving 1998 on bikes...
 
What's a 'built after 1997' ?

I have an old 1991 frame and I intend to build it up this year 2008 do I post it in post 1997 ? (defined as built date)

Also If I put modern components on it do I post in in post-1997 or pre-1997 ....

/pedantic mode off..


I'll post it in pre-1997 as to me it's the frame era that defines the retro-ness not the build date or the components..

But just thought I put in a silly post before the rest ask these questions.

I just think all 'proper' modern stuff should not be on here anyway. It is RetroBike not RetroBike and some modern stuff oh and well some future stuff as well. ;)
 
i like it

im keeping this for posterity

"Think most could agree stuff pre 1995 is retro and post 2000 is not. I basically picked somewhere in the middle"

i can see in at least a week someone asking why you chose 97 :LOL:

lets try not to get too regimented . bmx has old , mid , new and theres race and freestyle for each :LOL:
 
FluffyChicken":21yfr4js said:
What's a 'built after 1997' ?

I have an old 1991 frame and I intend to build it up this year 2008 do I post it in post 1997 ? (defined as built date)

Also If I put modern components on it do I post in in post-1997 or pre-1997 ....

/pedantic mode off..


I'll post it in pre-1997 as to me it's the frame era that defines the retro-ness not the build date or the components..


Yes, the frame is key.

Think old frame with modern bits is neo retro. Maybe we need another forum ;) <--joke by the way

FluffyChicken":21yfr4js said:
But just thought I put in a silly post before the rest ask these questions.

I just think all 'proper' modern stuff should not be on here anyway. It is RetroBike not RetroBike and some modern stuff oh and well some future stuff as well. ;)

As quite a few posts over the last few weeks have shown defining what is modern vs retro is absolutely impossible. It's too subjective. If you have the solution let me know....
 
" If you have the solution let me know...."

on retrorides you have to put the year of manufacture in the title as well as the name

in theory you could search for a particular make and year and get a list of just those if you thought retro died at a particular point in time

kinda takes the variety out of it though :LOL:
 
John":x8nvnhlh said:
I just think all 'proper' modern stuff should not be on here anyway. It is RetroBike not RetroBike and some modern stuff oh and well some future stuff as well. ;)

As quite a few posts over the last few weeks have shown defining what is modern vs retro is absolutely impossible. It's too subjective. If you have the solution let me know....[/quote]

Sorry 'proper' as in the past few years and still available to buy quite readily.

Not that grey hard to define area ~ at 1997 ;)

Though interest and the general people who keep the site alive by posting will define the grey area. Just let it work itself out unless it deviates from yours and the other initial founders of the site, intended it to be.
 
Yay '97! Means I actually do own something "retro", the powers that be have spoken...it's too late to take it back *snigger* ;)
 
Oh come on its not that hard :LOL: :LOL: :LOL:


As far as I'm concerned a retro frame with modern bits just isnt retro. It just isnt interesting, and it shouldnt be in here - no one will be interested anyway...


The whole idea of this forum is to celebrate building and riding RETRO mountain bikes - frame and their components.


I still cant see the frikkin point of someone putting 2005 gear on a 1992 Kona.


Actually do it. Why not? Then post the bike and see what the readers say?

It really seems b**dy pointless.


Can we start to see proper retrobikes in the early section please? :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :D :D
 
This made me chuckle ....

Maybe we should of used ........ Ancient MTBS & Dinosaurs !! :LOL: :LOL:
 
Back
Top