Isn't it time to update the cut-off date for 'retro'?

Raging_Bulls":2o988lxz said:

Same here. With the aid of 25.000 brake boosters at the front and a broom stick between the spokes, I never had problems doing endos with canti brakes.

In all seriousness, Cantis are a pain in the you-know-what to set up, and even then they simply don't perform as good as a set of cheap Vee brakes.

Click to expand...

All V's did was increase the mechanical advantage at the brake arm and reduce it at the brake lever. This meant the cable tension and hence stretch was reduced giving a less spongy feel and I guess a slight increase in efficiency. My canti's work just as well as most of my V brakes but I do have some shimano parallel push V's with servowave levers and Koolstops and they are noticably more powerfull. A combination of the pads and servowaveyness of the levers I think.

JamesM":3bcgq6kc said:

Raging_Bulls":3bcgq6kc said:

Same here. With the aid of 25.000 brake boosters at the front and a broom stick between the spokes, I never had problems doing endos with canti brakes.

In all seriousness, Cantis are a pain in the you-know-what to set up, and even then they simply don't perform as good as a set of cheap Vee brakes.

Click to expand...

All V's did was increase the mechanical advantage at the brake arm and reduce it at the brake lever. This meant the cable tension and hence stretch was reduced giving a less spongy feel and I guess a slight increase in efficiency. My canti's work just as well as most of my V brakes but I do have some shimano parallel push V's with servowave levers and Koolstops and they are noticably more powerfull. A combination of the pads and servowaveyness of the levers I think.

Click to expand...

Not quite. With cantis, the force applied to the brakes by the brake cable works in two directions, inwards, squeezing the wheel rim, and upwards, trying to pull the brake bosses towards the seat post. With Vs, this force is applied directly to squeezing the rim at 90degrees, hence the extra power possible. The brake lever has to pull more cable to pull the brake arms together, but it is not this leverage ratio that increases the power. It is the different manner in which it is applied.

Yeah good point, the cable arrangement is more direct with V's so that improves efficiency too. The point I was tring to make, as you said, was that the extra power you get with V's comes from a more efficient design and not an increase in mechanical advantage/leverage as many people believe.

It's really all about the brakes, isn't it?

Retro: pre-98 cantis
Neo retro: 98-2003 vs
Modern: 2004-?

Maybe a rule should be coined?

For every 4 years the site is up, add 1 year?

And 4-arm chainsets... :shock:
yuck.

I think also it's that from 1998 front suspension was a standard feature.
From 2004 full suspension moved from experiments to maturity.

Actually that's a big reason for neo-retro. Hardtails reached maturity around 1998, while there was then a phase of experimentation on full sus from 1998-2004. :?

I think the 1998 rule is fine as it is tbh. I'd go as far to say it should be earlier. 2000+ bikes are just out of date, not retro.

(Put's tin hat on....)

Having a static date of 1998 is fine for most of the members on here, it fits with their heyday. However, at 28 I get the impression i'm one of the younger posters on here and I don't think people much younger than me will continue to be attracted to the site in big numbers as it stands. If the powers that be want to attract the next generation of retro-bikers (and the may well not want to) then maybe a one size fits all retro definition won't work. Personally I think in future we'd be best served with multiple sections based on era, or by decade. Not an elegant solution, but at least it's horses for courses.

There is no intention of updating the 'cut off'. Equally there is no suggestion as to exactly what year retro starts and ends. It is simply no possible to define and is very much dependent on point of view.

If people have 'newer retro bikes' they can be posted in the 98+ forum. In fact it was hoped this is how the site would develop with the addition of the 98+ forum. Whilst the original focus was on the mid 90s and earlier (and remains as such for many / most) we understand that for many their 'retro era' will be newer - hence the 98+ forum.

I know your the Chief John but thats a bit daft :?

Just get rid of contentious dates and base it on the slogan "If its Old School its in".

Every generation has its own generation of old school.

Saying pre 98's retro and post 98's less retro is getting a bit mines better than yours nyaa nyaa nee nyaa nyaa

Lets all be friends