Retro or Old?

Anonymous · Nov 11, 2005

Last month I rebuilt my '94 Dave Yates after a particularly lovely respray by Bob Jackson.

Piccies are here: http://www.32sixteen.com/2005/10/dave-yates-rebuilt.html

I've tried to build it up period style (many of the parts on there pre-dated the frame), but I think I'll eventually update some of it, for instance some nice lightweight white XC forks might make it less XC-Jey and more suitable for modern riding styles.

Anyway, just thought people might like to look and decide if it's really retro or just old.[/url]

Anonymous · Nov 11, 2005

...forgot to add

Many of the donor parts came from this '93 Rocky Mountain Hammer.

http://www.32sixteen.com/2005/08/repair-or-repaint.html

They ended up on the Hammer from the Yates in the first place when I picked up the Hammer frame for 90 quid and swapped the parts so that I could get the Yates resprayed. That was three years ago.

tangent · Nov 11, 2005

Cable actuate Hope discs surely makes it fit for a museum of some kind :!:

Retro / old seems the same, maybe retro=old stuff that's still admired , revered today (and I would add still works, although I don't think that's always essential

)

very nice looking frame,

anyone remeber the very colourful Dave Yates paintjobs from yesteryear?
MBUK used to run whole features about them!

rutteger · Nov 11, 2005

Your Dave Yates is damn cool, especially with those original Hope mechanical disks. Not too many of those about in the wild. Oh, and I'd leave it rigid.

The RM is also a mighty fine bicycle.

Both deserve a post in Reader's Bikes

scant · Nov 11, 2005

the Yates looking f'kin awesome & yeh leave it rigid

Retro or Old?

Anonymous

Anonymous

tangent

Senior Retro Guru

rutteger

scant

Retro Wizard

Similar threads

Latest posts