Ugly modern bikes

Re:

Tom79":2ru7x4em said:

If we all liked the same thing life would be boring. I love retro bikes, absolutely love them. It evokes an emotion in me and that nostalgic feeling.

I mean my Nan likes Vera Lynn, I like The Prodigy....all a matter of taste.

This is my modern bike and frankly I personally think it's stunning. Others think it is a monstrosity! I love it just as much as my retro bike, but they are totally different animals used for completely different purposes and I don't think modern bikes can be judged the same way.

Click to expand...

I have a Lapierre X-Control, love it to bits, rides nice, not too bad weight wise and above all I like it cos it's not a bloody Merida or a Scott that everyone here seems to be riding.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...

For every ugly modern bike there's an equally ugly retro bike.

Specialized and Kona are (and always have been) a bit of a generic yawn-fest.. IMHO of course

Agree with many above. The biggest crime on modern bikes are graphics.

There is another thing going on modern bikes that i call "Jurassic Park syndrom"
In the first Jurassic Park The CG work was so expensive that they really thought about every second of animation, resulting in very tastefull scenes so the speak..
As the CG got more accesible scripts and animations went mental.

Same on bikes with hydroforming and carbon.. Many designers if you let them free, they cant contain themselves..

Despite all this, If you search a bit you can build clean modern bike with retro spirit.

First I will apologize for not reading all of the posts in all the 6 pages over here. Also, please excuse my preconceptions, but I skimmed through a few and I suspect it's the usual "form and function" battle, the hardcore purists who say all new bikes are pieces of crap and the ones who want to open eyes about not everything new being bad. I am more of the latter.

I don't want to go again through what I've said on various occasions before: bikes as a whole are better and more affordable. Some will want me lynched for that, but V-brakes are a big leap forward in terms of braking power and adjustibility. Cantis are jokes, sorry. The same goes for suspension with too few exceptions. You can get pretty cheap forks these days that work one billion times better than any Manitou or RockShox from the nineties. I have quite a few of both worlds. Of course, you can't get mid range steel bikes and graphics are ugly as phuck, but you can't have them all. Tires are also on big improvement, as old skinny ones are garbage regardless of the Kevlar. Geometry is also a big plus on new bikes. I bet no one can really explain the sheer benefits of having 135 mm stems with 560 mm handlebars. Drivetrain? I love the 8-speed ruggedness, but adding 2 cogs in the back just to lose at least one ring in the front can be a benefit. New systems seem to be pretty solid, just that no one tells us about how fast chains are getting worn out. Oh, and pretty much ALL old suspension bikes were awful.

I don't want to blabber too much more. I just came from a press-camp of a generic brand that I don't enjoy too much and I've got to ride their prototype 650 B 140 mm bike with SRAM XX1. It can be improved in terms of headangle and chainstay length, but it was a blast to ride and I could bet it goes better than pretty much any other bike on this forum while the fun factor is maxed. And the 11 in the back? I doubted them, but they are a dream!

Respect all bikes, but remember that change is good.
Mx

As far as OldvsNew Function goes, i think you pretty much summed it up.
Perhaps only tires didn't improve that much imo.. To me is just trend towards weight instead longevity. (now smaller and lower knobs than used to be)

Thanks for the reply!

If I think about the Z-Max's, Pyschos, Dart/Smokes and all the old ones that came in 1.95 and 2.1 width with hard rubber and prone to snakebites, I really can't compare them to a basic, let's say... Maxxis of today in kinda mundane 2.35 width with a nice pattern and a moderate weight that still lasts quite a while. It's just an example. Maybe I missed out on the good tires back in the day? Circa 1998 I remember IRC's being quite appreciated and I was thrilled by them when I got to ride some, but I wasn't impressed by any others, to be honest. I wished badly for a Alpha Bite in 2.35 width and when I got it I was so disappointed that I'd rather burned it.

Mx

Maxipedia":a0d72lj5 said:

Cantis are jokes, sorry.Mx

Click to expand...

Really? Last weekend i rode out with about 20 guys, my bike with cantis, every other bike with discs. We rode XC including some pretty steep downhill technical singletrack and i had no problem whatsoever. Since my canti brakes are powerful enough to lock wheels shod with fresh tyres on various terrains and gradients and give me more than enough braking confidence then how is it a "joke" i wonder? I have a susser bike with XT discs but i'm yet to find a trail it can ride which my retro cannot.

Yes newer bikes have progressed for sure, but there is a whole lot of hype out there too.

I was expecting that. How is a brake that is nowadays very cheap, powerful and very easy to set up a "hype"? V-brakes and especially their down to earth incarnations were the ones who brought accessible stopping power to the masses, so their benefit is huge. Cantis? I wonder how a brake that takes so much fiddling to set up and usually requires at least two different keys for that is anything else than a joke. I know that brakes are a very personal experience, but it's also a question of how fast you ride and in what terrain you do ride. I guess the guys in cyclocross don't use their brakes much, for instance. I rode the same trails I ride with my DH bike these days 15 years ago on a bike with cantis. The difference is that no I am probably going 35 kmh, whereas back them I was going 15 kmh. I've had various cantis and still do, but not on the bikes I ride serious with. And there is one more thing: the reason why the industry abandoned them is not hype of V-brakes. We are way over that and product managers are very knowledgeable people. More knowledgeable than us, most of the times.

Mx

Work in a bike shop as a mechanic for just 6 months. That will give you a better idea of what is going on in the cycling world.

MTB has shrunk while general cycling has ballooned. Repairs and servicing are getting expensive. Forks and bushings are more complicated creating a more stressful relationship between the owner, bike itself and the retailer. Full suspension is a joke. 99% of the time you dont actually need it and can ride just as well without it but the magazines say otherwise. The whole MTB business would fail if we all just got on with cycling rather than hung up on what fashion tells us we need.

Re:

Tom79":8cb9d7di said:

If we all liked the same thing life would be boring. I love retro bikes, absolutely love them. It evokes an emotion in me and that nostalgic feeling.

I mean my Nan likes Vera Lynn, I like The Prodigy....all a matter of taste.

This is my modern bike and frankly I personally think it's stunning. Others think it is a monstrosity! I love it just as much as my retro bike, but they are totally different animals used for completely different purposes and I don't think modern bikes can be judged the same way.

Click to expand...

Looking at this Lapierre i think it actually represents all thats bad with todays design (graphicswise).
Too much white thats broken by stripes and flashes of contrasting colour and 3big logos of the brand on just one side.
Add to it white spots such as pedals, seat and tensioner and also big white Fox and Fulcrum logos.
All you see is not a bike but white/black/blue stroboscope.
Although there is lot of hydroforming, frame is quite elegant and bike could look much better if they would fire the graphic designer.
Otherwise im sure it rides great..