- Feedback
- View
nothing wrong with that my prestige has 07 xtr rechs chain cassette shifter and v's makes my old girl come to life 
looks pretty to
looks pretty to 
RETRO V NEW
- Thread starter Sithlord
- Start date
- Feedback
- View
i done that once for a laughtstevet1":3e467j99 said:
wasn't funny :cry: :cry:Hey Guys , thanks for your views, really appreciate it, I am obtaining a Serotta T-Max in about a week or so, and although I was thinking of a fluttering of XC Pro or XTR M900, I thought, this will be the main XC Bike I use the most ! So I was thinking of possibly kitting it out with some CK Black hubs on XC717s with Pauls brakes and Sram X0 , And using a Cooks crank, or even a new M971 XTR unit , Ti CK Headset, Eastern Bar n Stem etc,, I think it would look alright and would function really well, along with dropping the weight down a little, am going to try and get a mainly black colour scheme going on 
Opinions on this please ?
Opinions on this please ?
an interesting aside is that some months ago we were discussing the relative merits of MTBR vs Retrobike forums and the different approaches some of the americans have to older bikes compared to us in Europe - the conclusion of the thread was that (making a sweeping generalisation) we prefer 'hotrods' in Europe i.e. old frames with new kit and they prefer period correct kit.
TheGreenRabbit
Retrobike Rider
- Feedback
- View
Who cares as long as you like it. I have been thinking about my own bike style and its definatly a fit what I want to. Both my bikes are a real mutant with a mish mash of parts, my mountain bike is fairly standard but the road bike is a real rat bike. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_bike Time for a Rat Bike of the month !!!!
I've given this much thought whilst building my Funk.
When I proposed a spec I got constructive coments on componants not being 1992 or too late.
This set me thinking. If I had bought my Funk back in 1992 i would have probably used it for 5-6 years before buying something new. Now, as things broke or wore out they would have been replaced. As previously mentioned, taste and fashion would have also had me scurrying to my LBS to buy new parts. I doubt that I would have tracked down a NOS 4 year old XTR rear mech if it got t***ed against a rock- the latest bit of kit would have taken its place. Therefore by the time i sold/threw it in the shed it would have been a much different animal to the one bought several years previously.
I had this in mind when buying the bits for the Funk and have a spread of 1992 to 1995, which IMHO is perfectly acceptable for a 92 bike.
Now then, does this time spread work in reverse?? Would it be OK to build, lets say a 1995 frame up with 1990-93 parts??
What I'm trying to say is that IMHO I think a build should be sympathetic to the era without rigidly sticking to a frozen point in time.
Just my 2 pennarth
Retro in spirit.
When I proposed a spec I got constructive coments on componants not being 1992 or too late.
This set me thinking. If I had bought my Funk back in 1992 i would have probably used it for 5-6 years before buying something new. Now, as things broke or wore out they would have been replaced. As previously mentioned, taste and fashion would have also had me scurrying to my LBS to buy new parts. I doubt that I would have tracked down a NOS 4 year old XTR rear mech if it got t***ed against a rock- the latest bit of kit would have taken its place. Therefore by the time i sold/threw it in the shed it would have been a much different animal to the one bought several years previously.
I had this in mind when buying the bits for the Funk and have a spread of 1992 to 1995, which IMHO is perfectly acceptable for a 92 bike.
Now then, does this time spread work in reverse?? Would it be OK to build, lets say a 1995 frame up with 1990-93 parts??
What I'm trying to say is that IMHO I think a build should be sympathetic to the era without rigidly sticking to a frozen point in time.
Just my 2 pennarth
Retro in spirit.
Similar threads
