Why do you ride retro?

[Void(EN12-82)]

Hi guys,

Well here's my first awesome very deep and wicked thread

Anyway, on the more serious side: Last night in bed I was thinking (gf is outta the country so I tend to think a bit more then)... Why do we ride retro? Apart from it being cool (of course), I was actually thinking "Is it because modern day bikes are just more and more mass produced not longer exclusive and unique"?? I mean, c'mon everything has just about been invented back in the 90ies I think.

Good front suspension for example, and a modern Fox F80RL is about 350gr heavier than my old Judy FSX. Carbon frames? Done that (Specialized Epic etc). Disc brakes? Done that (ProStop on the Fisher RS1 and San Andreas as early as 1990/1991). Full suspension? Done that too (again, Fisher RS1, GT RTS etc).

So isn't all this modern day stuff more like "a state of mind" (or how do you say that)?? I mean, whenever I walk into a bike shop and start talking about me riding my KLEIN without any suspension, most people go :shock: :shock: WTF? You ride without suspension?!?! You must be totally uberf*cked up in the head dude! That's not even doable, riding without 80 or 100mm of suspension (and I'm talking XC guys). But "in the olden dayz", there was even slalom on totally rigid bikes. Even DH started off with rigids and after that you could easily be world champion with a hardtail and a nice RockShox RS1 or MAG20 up front.

So where does all this come from? I mean it's not like I'm located in Arizona or I ride in the Rocky Mountains or anything. This is just plain old Holland I'm talking about. OK OK, also a little bit of Belgium but that's not a real country ;-)

I was just wondering, how would the lads 'n gals over at retrobike think about this? I know some (or most) of you also have a modern bike, but since I sold my Scott Scale I really don't see the need to get another modern bike again... simply because also a GT Zaskar or RTS, or a Yeti ARC will do the trick.

And another funny thing: when I was at the Dutch Championships last year, there were quite a lot of bikers riding non-suspension bikes. Lots of Scott Scales with one of those Pace forks put in it... so do I have a point here or don't I?

Void(EN12-82)

PS: No I'm not drunk, it's 10AM in the morning here ;-)

 

[Pickle]

I ride retro because my RTS was brand new, fresh outa the box when I purchased it, and I just haven't got rid of it

Ok I own a new hardtail, but that was purchased before I found this site, so ideally I want a retro hardtail.

My heart is still riding in the mid-90's

 

[BikePimp]

I have a nice fairly modern Ventana El Saltamontes w/ 100mm Front and rear travel. Sure it's comfortable, shifts great, disc brakes stop on a dime, but it's a numb feeling. I only ride it on rough rocky trails or when I want to bomb down a hill.

I've been riding my retro bikes more than my modern ones. I feel that I am more one with the trail on say my GT RTS Team than the Ventana. Sure my body is more tired and beat up at the end of the day when I ride a retro ride, but I've been enjoying it more. Still enjoy riding a hard tail even on rocky rides. Just have to be off the saddle more and shift my weight around on the larger rocks that I would almost be able to stay seated on the Ventana.

I also like the lower center of gravity on a retro bike with the bottom bracket being lower and the front end not being so high up. I also prefer the 8sp drivetrain over the 9sp for durability.

So yeah, and older bike will do the trick.

 

[Tallpaul]

Because for £500 i can build a Sandvik Ti frame with full XT and Rock Shox with a few nice parts from Hope, Control Tech etc, and it looks and rides like it would have done in 1996.

The best bit is that despite the 12 year old technology, 95% of the time she is as effective as a modern hardtail costing more than twice that.

 

[scant]

Good front suspension for example, and a modern Fox F80RL is about 350gr heavier than my old Judy FSX. Carbon frames? Done that (Specialized Epic etc). Disc brakes? Done that (ProStop on the Fisher RS1 and San Andreas as early as 1990/1991). Full suspension? Done that too (again, Fisher RS1, GT RTS etc).

;-)

comparing a judy fsx to a fox forx (& I own several pairs of both) is like comparing a model T ford to a bugatti veyron. same for pro stop discs & modern brakes etc etc.
while its true that nothing new has beeb invented, its been significantly tweaked to the point where most modern works significantly better than the old.
I dont RIDE retro because it doesnt work v.well in comparison. most retro stuff is however beautiful, which is why I like it

 

[Void(EN12-82)]

comparing a judy fsx to a fox forx (& I own several pairs of both) is like comparing a model T ford to a bugatti veyron. same for pro stop discs & modern brakes etc etc.

I guess this is true up to some point... but if I read about in the other thread about how well canti's would work (or not), you see one saying "praise the Lord for disc brakes" while I myself cannot agree on that one. Same would go for "old stuff vs new stuff" I guess? I never had any mechanical disc brakes or magura's, but I think there is also a bit of personal experience in this?

And personally, I can't say that my Fox F80 (now ex-F80) worked any better than my Judy FSX... maybe I should add that it has Englund cartridges in it, though. But never noticed any difference, not even with sideway flex (I could also hear my disc scraping the caliper sometimes when going uphill without the lockout in effect). Because of the smaller space between disc and caliper, I can actually better adjust my FSX with canti's to "not scrape" the rim/tire ;-)

Void

 

[scant]

dude, you need to take your fox forx to a suspension tuner, they should pi$$ on the FSX for pure performance. air damped englunds were frankly cr@p in comparison!

for pure modulation yes I prefer cantis & V brakes. for outright power, mega long DHs (i'm talking alpine length) & performance in the wet disc brakes are mucho better. I got sick of wearing out rim sidewalls & rebuilding rims once a year, reason I went to disc brakes.

but hey, if you're loving riding the older stuff, cool for you

 

[Void(EN12-82)]

dude, you need to take your fox forx to a suspension tuner, they should pi$$ on the FSX for pure performance. air damped englunds were frankly cr@p in comparison!

OI, wanna take it outside?! Alright then, fire up the BBQ ;-)

Nah, I can imagine you liking the Fox better. Don't wanna say the Fox ain't no good. Absolutely loved that fork! So don't get me wrong. If anyone asks me what fork to get I'd say get a Fox any day... It's just that for me personally there wasn't a difference between them. Only downside on the Fox was that you "need to have" sag :?: But after my dealer had adjusted it to more pressure (so it got really stiff and rebounced a lot faster) it was a super fork.

And as for long fast downhills, we don't have those here in Holland so I'm talking from an XC kind of view. Although I would really like to try out my S-Bike down a ski slope once it's finished (if it'd survive that) :twisted: :twisted:

 

[cherrybomb]

I ride retro for a number of reasons.
I likes the way the older stuff rides. I know the new stuff works better but I enjoy riding the bikes I have.
I guess that it's the same with lots of stuff; older gear doesn't work perfectly so it has a character of it's own. Like Scant says, the technology has been tweaked to to a point where stuff performs much better than it did, you can't compare a new disk brake to an old prostop, BUT if you tried the same bike with five different disk brakes (around the same price point) from say 2000, you would be able to feel the difference between them. I seriously doubt you could say the same for new kit it all works equally as 'well'.

I know I could blast down hill at 50mph on a new 6" travel 'rig' (that's what they call them ain't it?), but I'd have a bigger grin on my face doing the same run at 20mph on me '89 rigid Karakorum.

On top of that I'm a tight arse and don't want to spend any money, so I'm stuck with the stuff I already have.............and I mean; second hand is always so much cheaper!

 

[theboy]

two issues here for me.

1) Whilst the new stuff is a LOT better performance wise than the stuff from ten+ years ago, I am no better a rider (in fact recent excursions on - and then abruptly OFF - the bike have shown that I actually have less ability on a bike now) so therefore whilst my 'proper' bike is v nice, and has 27 gears, 185mm discs, decent 120mm forks - its way better than I will ever be, I will never push the kit too much.

2) (the most pertinent issue for me) In 1992, when I first picked up a MTB mag and looked at the pictures of the shiney lovely mountain bike things (I have always had bikes, its a family thing) I was hooked, but at the tender age of 12, and obviously through my teenage years I couldnt afford any of it. Now, I have slightly more money, but the 'stuff' is also less expensive.