There was a commment in the Cannondale thread about the end of retro being the point at which parts started working properly. That really is elitest bollocks
There was a few things i didn't agree with in that thread, "canti brakes, rigid forks, quill stems and skinwall tyres are the cornerstones of retro" i dont agree with this, black wall tyres have always been available AFAIK, i had skinwalls on my Zaskar BITD and found they got grubby looking very quickly (especially with black rims) and were hard work to keep clean so for a rider i'll always use blackwalls.
Canti brakes require skill and patience to set up properly, two things i dont have so i usually go for V's, I'll be useing V's on my 94 Manitou if i ever see it
, that will probably be sacrilage to some but i'm considering using Canti's on the 91 Clockwork i've got coming as i had V's on my last one, it's swings and roundabouts.
I dont agree with the rigid forks being a "cornerstone of retro" as Rockshocks have been around since the dawn of time, i agree with quill stems though but a lot of bikes as with V-brakes must have been upgraded to the A-head system BITD so could this not be regarded as a retro mod
I've been into Classic cars for years and the same debate happens with them, should a car become a classic through age alone ?, in my mind a 76 Vauxhall Viva or a 79 Morris Marina is a classic worthy of preservation if it's in good condition but a few would disagree as these were bread and butter cars in their day designed to be used and discarded, only stuff like Astons and Jags are Classics but then will a 08 Citroen C2 or Ford Mondeo be regarded as a classic in 20 years time ?
Dont thing this is a debate with a clear answer but a line must be drawn somewhere.