What is your favourite type of build?

How do you like your bikes restored?

Not meaning to be awkward but I like all of the above :roll:

Every frame, IMHO, will suit a different style, and usually when I'm involved budget plays a large part

I tend to go for modern-ish parts on an old frame. Not always though - usually a mix and match of what works, what I think looks good and what I have lying around. I need something I am not afraid to ride in any condition and I can accept will break.

That's why I will never win BOTM

letmetalktomark":1s2ufthv said:

Not meaning to be awkward but I like all of the above :roll:

Every frame, IMHO, will suit a different style, and usually when I'm involved budget plays a large part

Click to expand...

What he said.

Can't say I have a preference, there's a place for everything.

Don't really care too much, as long as its a rider not a garage queen.

Not overly keen on factory spec replicas, little too anal for my liking

Like bikes built with a mix of parts as upgrading parts etc. is what we all do anyway which makes a build unique, hardly anyone leaves a bike standard do they?

not overly fussy really!!

just like to see bikes to how the rider wants it to look feel and ride..!! aesthetic colour matching is always a bonus though!

not too keen on factory perfect replicas or garage queens that never get ridden.. build your bike up how you want it to ride and look!! and get out there and RIDE it

I'll put modern stuff on when there is a clear funtional reason, such as v-brakes over cantis. Otherwise period ish stuff is nice (and sometimes neccesary) Not fussed aboutfactory spec or 100% correct year. Whatever gets the bike up and running is good for me!

Difficulty I have is that no bike I own or have owned in the past 20 years came as a complete bike, all framesets only. So factory build isn't really an option. I do try and be period correct with the builds but the big driving force is building bikes to the spec that I wrote in the back of my Maths book back in 1989-1992 to while away the hours.... Sort of why most of my bikes are from that period!

I have often noticed that one of the big differences with this site and MTBR is that we are driven by builds, they are driven by 'barn finds' or bikes that have sat complete for years. Wondered why, is it because our sence was so much smaller that bikes where only bought by those who truely wanted them and everything was so expensive that we always took the upgrade route rather than just buy a whole new bike? Barn finds are always cropping up on MTBR, but finding an original spec bike over here from the 80s/early 90s is impossible!

Period correct is my only real sticking point; as for being a replica/bling/functional, that's really down to the individual bike. I've seen good and bad examples of every type.

The only thing I really fail to see the point of is modern, workhorse parts on a retro frame. Fair enough if it's an old frame of yours and you're keeping it going as a commuter or whatever - but why post it on this website?*

*There are exceptions to this, I believe that some modern parts are retro and also that some retro bikes are so timeless that modern parts are suitable (i.e. an RC-300 is still retro, so being built with modern XTR and discs is not an issue for me. Also, some really good Ti frames deserve to be ridden hard and require the componentry to match). But there is a large population here who think retro only means old, therefore this philosophy is perhaps not popular.