Post or pre 97?

Rather than go into details here, I'd rather leave this one to personal opinion. It seems there are opinions for and against...I'd appreciate it if you could click on my link to my Explosif build thread and take the poll - there is some chat on page 2 regarding the issue but rather than my build thread become a forum on whether the build is in the right section or not, i'd rather sort it out now and act accordingly

Regards,
Donnie

FWIW I think you are making a mistake listening to the noisy one or two who are making a big deal about it. At the end of the day their opinions are worth diddly and the only ones that carry any weight are the mods - if they don't like your thread they will move it.

For me thread spoiling and trolling is at least as bad as a technical infringement of the date rules and some of those posting should know better. I personally wouldn't pander to them with that poll.

My 5c and worth diddly too

Your diddley makes a sensible point. I did e-mail a mod asking them to comment but had no response. I think the general consensus is post 97...

Thats part of the reason i don't bother posting build threads anymore.

I am in the same boat exactly with a 99 voodoo hoodoo, it's a steel frame with exactly the same geometry as my 97 erzulie, it doesn't have disc tabs and is essentially a pre 97 frame. I have a mix of old and new parts for it.

The conclusion I had reached was i would get the same reaction as you have, so would not bother with a build thread,

However the hoodoo does not fit with the post 98 section either and it's largely uber modern bike builds.

As has been said this is retro bike, and to a large degree I agree that there is a need for a cut off date but if a distinction is needed then there should be no place on this forum for modern bikes, or maybe some dank dark corner where these bikes can go away from newer bikes which are still very much retrobikes

Maybe we should have 3 sections: <1997, 1998-2003 and >2003 (modern)

And why 2003?? Because those bikes are 10 year old now and anything that is less than 10 years old I consider modern...

I don't see what the issue is, frame is 1998, you call it a 98, its a 98, what is hung off it is irrelevant. My GT is a 96, but it seems to be having more and more modern bit hung of it, is still a 96 though...

For what it is worth, personally I think it should be 2000...but then I think it should be 2000 for HT's but still 97 for FS as thats when DH started to really separate from XC. So am still happy with 97 being the cutoff.

But that is how the powers that be who own the site have specified it, they pay for the site, they can run it as they like.

Personally, I really couldnt care where its posted..... its only the pedants and jobsworths who frown on a few months eitherway of the "deadline"

Incidentally, my 2001 Kilauea with Kona's own brand double butted tubing came in at 1971g without paint.... which makes me happy that its in the same ballpark as the 97/98 Explosive


So, post away wherever you want..... your bike is lovely
Dont get too stressed about it. Some people would moan at the sound of their own (adeneoid affected) voice if there was an internet forum dedicated to it



G

Who cares where you post it, retro or modern is a state of mind! Or at least subjective.

My frame is stamped November 97, it was likely purchased in 98 and I'm fitting it with whatever kit I darn well feel like. Trolls get on my wick,

JT

Maybe we need a mid-school forum.