Does the cut-off date for this forum get updated each year?

personally I think it should be 2000, nice round number...(only because there a re few bikes i wouldn't mind from 98,99 and I still want em to be retro...)

but I do think, from my experience that by the end of 97, even where I lived in remotes-ville, that is when DH bikes went all sick and rad. If you wanted to take DH or XC vaguely seriously then you really needed a separate bike for each... that was the beginning of the end...
 
every year, sometime in autumn, they add one year to the 'ago'.
that way they don't have to move one years bikes worth of bikes n stuff out of one section and into another and change the forums titles.

unfortunately people litter the Retro 98+ section with truely modern bikes no matter what this site is called ..;)
 
i've said it before (& i don't expect a seperate section for it) but there is a massive difference between 'retro' & post '98, almost as much as a 1997 bike to a 1989 bike.

to me, if we were to go down this route i feel there should be a vintage section for the original mtb/atb's - the double u-braked farm gate looking things that kicked off the madness!! pre 1990 perhaps? the retro section for the bikes we know & love up to the 97/98 cut-off then a pre-modern (or post-retro) section covering us through the development of FS, the evolution of suspension forks & commonly seen cable discs evolving to commonly seen hydraulics up to maybe '04?. then, a modern section for all the generic moon-buggy wheeled, hydroformed aluminium, red, white or black painted homogeneous turds that float about in a pool of vagueness (with the odd nice bike chucked in like a shiny crouton!)
 
I would be up for a pre'89 split - makes a lot of sense - I think it should include Klunkers style bikes of all ages too though.
 
I would deffo deff be up for a modern bike section, i tend not to look in the 98+ section because of the truly modern bikes in there.
 
The Ken":ysvmhtp6 said:
I would be up for a pre'89 split - makes a lot of sense - I think it should include Klunkers style bikes of all ages too though.
But surely John's main motivation was to break the forum up into manageable chunks. Although pre-89 makes sense from an historic point of view, I don't think there are enough pre-89 bikes on here for them to need their own forum.
 
Charlieboy28":3ujjmn81 said:
I would deffo deff be up for a modern bike section, i tend not to look in the 98+ section because of the truly modern bikes in there.


Where would the cut off be though? My 2009 Orange 5 looks quite similar to my old 2006 which was not that much different to the 2004. What's classed as modern? You could quite easily end up with a very narrow 98 to ? section with even less traffic then the current 98+ section which is pretty quite anyway.

I think it's fine as it is tbh and don't see the need to give John and the mods more work.
 
brocklanders023":1otqr05f said:
Charlieboy28":1otqr05f said:
I would deffo deff be up for a modern bike section, i tend not to look in the 98+ section because of the truly modern bikes in there.


Where would the cut off be though? My 2009 Orange 5 looks quite similar to my old 2006 which was not that much different to the 2004. What's classed as modern? You could quite easily end up with a very narrow 98 to ? section with even less traffic then the current 98+ section which is pretty quite anyway.

I think it's fine as it is tbh and don't see the need to give John and the mods more work.

that was sort of my point - the forum doesn't need altering but if it was looked at from a tech development point of view, there are a couple of options for sub-forums possibly. In the 98+ section we could have a 'look at the shiny shiny' section and in the retro we could potentially have a pre '90 sub section for those whose interests sparked before mine (my big period of lust for bikes I couldnt afford came between summer 95 & 99 - the high school years!)
 
Back
Top