When is Retro actually "Retro"

Mad Cow

Devout Dirtbag
At what point does something actually become retro?

Is there a date before which something is "officially" retro?

In motorsport circles, e.g. Classic Bike Racing, this is accepted as 1973, which is useless for our purposes.

So is there one? and if not should there be?
 
Retro is a state of mind. A bit like baggyness of (non bike) shorts. So, there can be no official single date attched.

One can never be too baggy (not even MC Hammer) so therefore one can never be too retro.
 
Ziggy":3agciokb said:
I don't think there is a date - a brand new bike can be retro...

yeah...

like a road movie doesn't actually need to have any roads in it.

It's a state of mind man.

:cool:
 
Wu-Tangled":3phfyxsc said:
Ziggy":3phfyxsc said:
I don't think there is a date - a brand new bike can be retro...

yeah...

like a road movie doesn't actually need to have any roads in it.

It's a state of mind man.

:cool:

The dictionary definintion of retro and the term we use here are pretty different...

As for a date, like Wu says....it's a state of mind :cool:
 
We had a similar discussion a few months back.

Anyway in the true sense of the word Retro refer to something new which has been made to look like or mimic a style from a previous time/era.

i.e. New Mini styled to look like an old one, Santa Cruz Nomad with curvy top tube similar to something a lot older etc etc.

A car, bike, clothing or other object which has period styling isn't really retro if was leading edge etc in its day but rather should be classed as classic or period.

Missuse ofthe term retro though means that the current meaning can almost be anything you want as there is no hard timeframe attachd to the term (something 2 years old can be retro as can something 50 or 75 years).

In the end its not worth worrying about, in 10 years time we'll probably be refering to our bikes as "post 80s fluro" perod machines or maybe "late 20th C" to ditinguish them from the "disc brake all mountain" Retro Machines ;)
 
Yeah I didn't actually have anything in mind.

As I bought my first mountain bike in 1989 and I'm still only on my fourth bike (and still own three of the four) I tend to get maximum value out of things, so don't neccessarily think of them as "old" or "retro".

Indeed until I bought my Epic in Feb 2005 (Yes I bought a last years bike so already out of date in many minds), I still referred to my (then) nine year old Scott as "my new bike".

Of course Retro is generally held to be something that is new but looks old. The more appropriate term might be "classic" or "veteran" but I like Retro as it has a much more ambiguous feel to it.

So yep it's a state of mind!
 
I think we ought to use classic and vintage. 20 years + could be vintage , 10-20 a classic? 5-10 just old? I see "retro" as an all encompassing term really.

That way a 96 machine is classic retro bike, an early fat chance is a vintage!
 

Latest posts

Back
Top