Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Fri Sep 30, 2016 4:14 am

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:49 pm 
rBoTM Winner
rBoTM Winner

Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 3:44 pm
Posts: 422
Location: at my computer
Spokesmann wrote:
Ill choose to ignore your utterly offensive remarks.

What you fail to grasp is that this is how Carlton bikes were in the mid 1970s. This bike is literally untouched, save for new tyres and a damn good clean. This is a reto bike, this is a retro forum.

It is not about self-centred, ingrained and arrogant snobs such as your self having a pop due to the fact the bike is not an 'Italian thoroughbred' or the like.

People like to you with the self righteous attitude just sicken me.

Rant over.


I thank you for not ignoring my comment and responding. I am well aware of the fact that the bike is close to original in every way, has an interesting aesthetic value and is in good knick. I see the same thing, in the Gios as well as others. So all things being equal in this way, what is the next criterion upon which a differentiation was made? Was there something unique, trail-blazing or special? Was this bike in some way especially appealing in the day? This is precisely where I get hung up. Perhaps I missed a photo of the bike in "before" state that would have made me marvel at the transformation that was made to arrive at the present state. Please help me understand.

The vote numbers obviously show that your bike is in some way special that escapes me. This is precisely why I have asked for education.

I personally look at older bikes/cars/watches or whatever as educational, the building blocks upon which their modern equivalents have been built, and the zeitgeist of their time or era. They do not need, by any means, to be thoroughbreds or expensive. As proof of this, you might be surprised to know that I completely restored a 1954 Fiat 500C "Topolino", the absolute lowest rung of the Italian car world. It is not high end, luxurious, sporting or exclusive. I likewise own and am extremely proud of a number of rather mundane but important bikes such as a Graziella folding bike and an Itera plastic bike. None of these could ever be mistaken as thoroughbreds or economically valuable, but they are significant and educational nonetheless. I have displayed them on equal footing with far more "prestigious" items and have often stood by them in person, at expos, to explain their historical relevance.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:53 pm 
Gold Trader / MacRetro rider
Gold Trader / MacRetro rider
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 12:23 am
Posts: 15600
thanks for the votes folks 8)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:54 pm 
rBoTM Winner
rBoTM Winner

Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 3:44 pm
Posts: 422
Location: at my computer
Spokesmann wrote:
ome more pics of my Criteriums and other here:

http://spokessmann.tripod.com/id11.html

For them that likes them... :wink:


Seeing the Criterium as part of your overall collection gives it relevance and importance that is absent when it stands alone. Perhaps this exchange will be the spur that is needed to bring about the opportunity for one future month to be set aside for "themed" collections. I can only imagine what type of collections might be presented. One could present a marque, a country, a production year, a style of bike... Could be quite fascinating! Especially if everybody had to explain the logic and significance of their collection, just as you have done on the linked site.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 5:42 pm 
r.B.o.T.M. & P.o.T.M. Winner
r.B.o.T.M. & P.o.T.M. Winner
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:41 pm
Posts: 2401
Location: Plymouth, UK
Citoyen du monde wrote:
Spokesmann wrote:
Ill choose to ignore your utterly offensive remarks.

What you fail to grasp is that this is how Carlton bikes were in the mid 1970s. This bike is literally untouched, save for new tyres and a damn good clean. This is a reto bike, this is a retro forum.

It is not about self-centred, ingrained and arrogant snobs such as your self having a pop due to the fact the bike is not an 'Italian thoroughbred' or the like.

People like to you with the self righteous attitude just sicken me.

Rant over.


I thank you for not ignoring my comment and responding. I am well aware of the fact that the bike is close to original in every way, has an interesting aesthetic value and is in good knick. I see the same thing, in the Gios as well as others. So all things being equal in this way, what is the next criterion upon which a differentiation was made? Was there something unique, trail-blazing or special? Was this bike in some way especially appealing in the day? This is precisely where I get hung up. Perhaps I missed a photo of the bike in "before" state that would have made me marvel at the transformation that was made to arrive at the present state. Please help me understand.

The vote numbers obviously show that your bike is in some way special that escapes me. This is precisely why I have asked for education.

I personally look at older bikes/cars/watches or whatever as educational, the building blocks upon which their modern equivalents have been built, and the zeitgeist of their time or era. They do not need, by any means, to be thoroughbreds or expensive. As proof of this, you might be surprised to know that I completely restored a 1954 Fiat 500C "Topolino", the absolute lowest rung of the Italian car world. It is not high end, luxurious, sporting or exclusive. I likewise own and am extremely proud of a number of rather mundane but important bikes such as a Graziella folding bike and an Itera plastic bike. None of these could ever be mistaken as thoroughbreds or economically valuable, but they are significant and educational nonetheless. I have displayed them on equal footing with far more "prestigious" items and have often stood by them in person, at expos, to explain their historical relevance.


Zzzzzz.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 1:04 pm 
r.B.o.T.M. & P.o.T.M. Winner
r.B.o.T.M. & P.o.T.M. Winner
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:41 pm
Posts: 2401
Location: Plymouth, UK
http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=111266

Before and after views of the Criterium, plus images of my other Carlton Criterium from the same year.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 4:10 pm 
Retro Guru

Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:50 pm
Posts: 322
Location: London
I like the second criterium more...there seems to be a different charm and I can't put my finger on it.

Do you own the pro am in the back ground... that is a nice bike as well


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 5:23 pm 
r.B.o.T.M. & P.o.T.M. Winner
r.B.o.T.M. & P.o.T.M. Winner
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:41 pm
Posts: 2401
Location: Plymouth, UK
toomski wrote:
I like the second criterium more...there seems to be a different charm and I can't put my finger on it.

Do you own the pro am in the back ground... that is a nice bike as well


I do, the Pro Am is going to go up for sale.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:25 pm 
Retro Guru

Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:50 pm
Posts: 322
Location: London
Im a short ass and that looks too big for me.... which is a good thing in this instance... :lol:

lets see some pics though.

Toomski


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:30 pm 
r.B.o.T.M. & P.o.T.M. Winner
r.B.o.T.M. & P.o.T.M. Winner
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:41 pm
Posts: 2401
Location: Plymouth, UK
toomski wrote:
Im a short ass and that looks too big for me.... which is a good thing in this instance... :lol:

lets see some pics though.

Toomski


Currently in bits. It has a 25" frame.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 04, 2010 8:49 am 
r.B.o.T.M. & P.o.T.M. Winner
r.B.o.T.M. & P.o.T.M. Winner
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:41 pm
Posts: 2401
Location: Plymouth, UK
toomski wrote:
I like the second criterium more...there seems to be a different charm and I can't put my finger on it.

Do you own the pro am in the back ground... that is a nice bike as well


QR large flange hubs?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group