Ugly Modern bikes

ibbz

Gold Trader
rBotM Winner
Karma King
Dyna-Tech Fan
Feedback
View
Thought I'd start this thread here, it's run it's course through 17 pages on the MTB forum but I think it'd be interesting to gather views of roadies regarding how many of us believe modern bikes are pig ugly.

Mountain bikes have always uglier than their Road brethren but these days MTB's are ugly beasts.

But the real shock are modern Road bikes, they've lost the grace elegance and artisan crafted feel of the retro bikes and instead are pseudo mtb slopes framed things with alloy over sized tubing, or plastic bits (Carbon) or completely composite.
Sure theyre very light and they fly like the proverbial of a shovel with all the modern race bred features but I'd say the majority of buyers aren't pro racers but rather hobbyists or commuters or weekend club cyclists or just people who want to keep fit or enjoy cycling.

Anyway I think modern bikes look horrid

Discuss
 
With road bikes there still exists a much wider range of traditional designs and styling, so the argument seems much less applicable to tarmac. Stuff like the Giant Defy, probably the best selling serious bike in the UK, is actually quite.graceful when you get up close to it.
 
ibbz":2opvi5uh said:
I'd say the majority of buyers aren't pro racers

But a lot of them want to be, or are trying to be. There are some very fast riders out there, competing week after week, and they want the best kit they can get. I have a friend who is 62, has been racing and competing for years and changes his bike every couple of seasons to take advantage of the latest advances.

Modern road bikes ugly?

Not in the same way that mtb's are, and as has been said, the classic designs still exists and in modern steels, like 725, 931 and 953.
 
NeilM":17snn8di said:
ibbz":17snn8di said:
I'd say the majority of buyers aren't pro racers

But a lot of them want to be, or are trying to be. There are some very fast riders out there, competing week after week, and they want the best kit they can get. I have a friend who is 62, has been racing and competing for years and changes his bike every couple of seasons to take advantage of the latest advances.

Modern road bikes ugly?

Not in the same way that mtb's are, and as has been said, the classic designs still exists and in modern steels, like 725, 931 and 953.

More or less agree on everything
But when I say modern I mean modern design and looks especially the MTB sloped top tube ones and the other carbon racers.
 
This is ultimately one of those topics where the end conclusion is something like: "to each their own, but I wouldn't be caught dead on one!" :)

Personally, I have never ridden or even sat on a modern bike - the closest I've come was a Giant Cadex MTB frame I built up as a single speed city bike about 10 years ago. I do have a soft spot somewhere for CAD-designed, angular, stealth bomber aesthetics, but feel that modern bikes lack character, or 'soul'.
 
NeilM":254kx1cz said:
ibbz":254kx1cz said:
I'd say the majority of buyers aren't pro racers

But a lot of them want to be, or are trying to be. There are some very fast riders out there, competing week after week, and they want the best kit they can get. I have a friend who is 62, has been racing and competing for years and changes his bike every couple of seasons to take advantage of the latest advances.

Modern road bikes ugly?

Not in the same way that mtb's are, and as has been said, the classic designs still exists and in modern steels, like 725, 931 and 953.

Indeed - although the integrated head tube is a bit clumsy-looking, the Genesis Volare (built with a 953 stainless steel tubeset) is quite traditional by 2013 standards:

_MG_2013.jpg


If I had the money, I'd buy one. Especially if they bring out a cyclo-cross version (I've a hunch the Madison-Genesis team will have to invest in one or two custom 953 CX bikes anyway for Ian Bibby to use in the autumn)!

David
 
There's definitely something aethetically awry in the headtube/stem in the current crop of bikes. The Trek Madone 7.9 is a prime example of it. An oversize stem looks tiny and badly out of proportion against the very fat headtube. Even the forks look like they don't fit against the headtube properly. But as has been previously said its worse amongst the pure race bikes. I think modern F1 cars are ugly too but i won't be taking one of them around either. Don't know if there's ever been a proper study into it be don't we all just have a golden age (teens to early 20s) at which we form most responsive to our environment. I know my main views on whats good or bad in music, cars and bikes to name three were formed at that time and don't really change that much.
 
To me form follows function - something that is high performance because if design and engineering is beautiful to my eye.

That said, I have to agree that amothering them with power ranger paint jobs does a lot to undo such beauty, although te late 80s and early 90s was when some of the worst offenders for this were at large.
 
Chopper1192":1twpqzk5 said:
To me form follows function - something that is high performance because if design and engineering is beautiful to my eye.

That said, I have to agree that amothering them with power ranger paint jobs does a lot to undo such beauty, although te late 80s and early 90s was when some of the worst offenders for this were at large.

One of the worst paint-job offenders in my mind was the magnesium-tubed Carrera Virago* offered by Halfords back in 2000 or thereabouts. It was only a single-colour paint job but came in a very unflattering "snotty" yellow-green tone....

David

*Saracen offered a very similar bike, probably made in the same factory in fact, but with a better choice of paint.
 
Back
Top