So we are all retrogrouches?

[mk one]

New bikes do interest me... but.....

The ones that look half descent are soooooooo expensive!

They are though, aren't they!

I like bikes, dont care how old or new they are really, but i cant really bring myself to pay the prices new bikes are sold for

 

[hamster]

New bikes don't interest me. I prefer the look of retro MTB's and I don't think I'd have much fun on newer bikes seeing as they plow through just about any terrain these days. It would make for some very boring rides in my local area. I also don't like a lot of the newer trends, such as wide handlebars, suspensions with loads of travel and huge wheels. I want to feel like I've been thrown around by a gorilla after every ride.

That's the essence of it.
We all KNOW that modern bikes are more capable; that's not the point. It's whether they are more FUN?

Just like cars: a diesel Focus will slaughter a 1966 Mini Cooper S. Which would be more fun though?

 

[ultrazenith]

In 1998 I could buy a GT Tempest with STX-RC, RS Indy forks and all this for £499. An Orange Clockwork with RST forks came in at £579

Even with inflation, I would get a 'better' bike in 1998 for £400 than I would for the equivalent £708 in todays money.

At least it would have more gears!

And for under 50 quid you could fit decent tyres and latex tubes and have a bike that rolls faster than an 800 quid bike with its OEM tyres and butyl tubes. OF course, depending on the terrain you ride, the bigger wheels and modern suspension *might* compensate for that, but the fact remains that it's easy to build a bike of comparable performance out of retro parts for a fraction of the price of a new entry to mid level MTB.

 

[gradeAfailure]

In 1998 I could buy a GT Tempest with STX-RC, RS Indy forks and all this for £499. An Orange Clockwork with RST forks came in at £579

Even with inflation, I would get a 'better' bike in 1998 for £400 than I would for the equivalent £708 in todays money.

At least it would have more gears!

Come on LGF, you're not even trying now..

Voodoo Hoodoo, £600. Decent geometry frame, air fork, Shimano Deore 1x10, Shimano discs, Maxxis tyres. Colleague bought one a couple of weeks ago and brought it in to work for me to set up for him. It's great tbh - if that was my budget for a bike then I'd be happy to have it. Dropper post and a decent set of tyres set up tubeless and you're still well under £800 (£499 from 1998 adjusted for inflation is about £850 now).

There's absolutely nothing wrong with questioning progress for progress' sake, and a lot of ideas have come and gone just because they were nonsense. URT anyone!? But the stuff that works, stays - because people buy it,and ignore the stuff that doesn't.

30 years ago, if you wanted to ride XC, you bought a mountain bike. DH? Mountain bike. Trials? Mountain bike. When the first proper DH bikes came on the scene, they were flexy wallowy beasts that were heavy, short, steep, and a pig to pedal anywhere. My main bike now would annihilate them on a DH course, yet weighs about the same as my first GT Timberline, can be pedalled all day, gets up hills fine, has a lifetime frame warranty, etc.

Sure, it cost me the equivalent of an £1800 bike back in 1993, but I'd say its probably stronger and more reliable than something of that price from back then.

The beauty of what we have now is the capability and choice - if you live in Norfolk and have flat XC, you can buy a steep-angled carbon race whippet that'll be insanely fast and efficient. If you live in the Lakes or Snowdonia, you can buy a winch-and-plummet Enduro bike that'll cope with anything this side of a WC DH track (and probably even those, just not at race speed!). Hell, if you want a fully rigid steel framed bike with bosses everywhere for rambling-by-bike, yup, they don't cost that much: https://www.planetx.co.uk/i/q/CBOOBZ29S ... ntain-bike

Ride what you want - it's all bikes, it's all pedalling, it's all good. If you're having fun, whatever you're on, you're doing it right.

 

[CassidyAce]

Ride what you want - it's all bikes, it's all pedalling, it's all good. If you're having fun, whatever you're on, you're doing it right.

Spot on.

 

[brocklanders023]

Re:

Agree with most of that except for:

There's absolutely nothing wrong with questioning progress for progress' sake, and a lot of ideas have come and gone just because they were nonsense. URT anyone!?

URT was not nonsense, it was specifically designed to act like a hardtail most of the time so to appeal to the folk who had ridden nothing but rigid or minimal travel HT's. It served it's purpose well even if it had a limited shelf life.

 

[torqueless]

Re:

Yeah but...

But the stuff that works, stays - because people buy it,and ignore the stuff that doesn't.

If you ask me, most people buy stuff because it is convenient, or because they've been manipulated into believing there is an emotional payoff available from doing so, or because they haven't thought through or don't care about the longer term ramifications of their purchase. 'Progress', 'the rational consumer'- these are myths. Do you think that an electric lawnmower is self-evidently 'progress' compared to a scythe, and that petrochemical fibres are 'progress' compared to wool? They might be, if you are not (yet) being asked to take personal responsibility for recycling/disposing of them at the end of their 'consumer lifetime'.

The beauty of what we have now is the capability and choice

If you must have a separate bike for each conceivable terrain, I would like to see the trailer you haul the other five in, behind whichever one you are currently favouring, in an unsupported race from Lands End to John 'o' Groats, against a chap on a 1930s- or even an 1890s roadster... or even a chap on Shanks' Pony, come to that.. you can even choose the route..