RETRObike - are we different to similar communities?

[theboy]

Ive been reminiscing about my childhood today, and cos my parents are odd, they were always carting me around the country dressed up as a victorian, or in twenties garb, to variously ride bikes from the 1900's or sit in the back of a Bentley Blower (not theirs!) and bounce around a field/racing circuit.

One thing got me thinking though, with both the Vintage bikes (and the sixties racers my dad was also briefly into), and Vintage/Classic cars, restoration is on the whole strictly 'to original spec', whereas we, in the RB community seem to shun that for an approach more akin to the Hot Rod scene, ie: if its from the right period (or looks it) - whack it on!

For me this is down to two factors - 1) Retro MTB's aint all that old really, and 2) Upgrading is at the very core of MTBing, often for no apparent reason

The US VRC community (read: MTBR) seems to be keener on the whole 'original spec' thing, but I must admit, I have only gone down this road with one of my projects to date.

So, are we an anomoly, or are there other 'scenes' (man) that have a similar take?

theboy

 

[Harryburgundy]

I used to be 'into' retro two-strokes....mainly RD's.
The 'scene' was divided between those obsessive types who would use 'made of cheese' hex heads on engine casings rather than Allen bolts...to preserve originality. And god forbid if you used the wrong type of bolt of the indicator stalks. :roll:
Equally though, there were plenty of people who would build stunning very non-original bikes.
Check out Nigel Kimbers site.
http://tinyurl.com/6cd2oh
Made me some lovely Carbon/SS end cans for my KR1-S.

I hope the retro scene in the UK doesn't go down the 'precious' route...otherwise bikes like Guybes' Kona (edit..oops..see it in Readers Wifes section, wrong link posted) will be lambasted for using a non-original colour...and its beautiful!

Not sure if any of the above has made any sense

Cheers, Carl

 

[cce]

who actually rode a completely stock bike back then?

anyone? you there, mr tumbleweed?


this is a scene of people reliving their youth.

 

[john]

Retrobike is a broad 'church' - that I feel (or is that hope) is the appeal of the site to many.
Although the main focus on retrobike does seem to be trick this isn't to the exclusion of period correct. There are some pretty outstanding examples of both in readers bikes - from one of Jezza's eye bleeding trimbles to dbmtb's super clean gios super record to one of ameybrook's exacting race replicas.

this is a scene of people reliving their youth.

At the end of the day that sums it up I think

 

[theboy]

fair point, maybe 'original spec' was not the correct phraseology, I kind of meant that we seem pretty happy to build 'Retro Bikes' with kit on that is more modern, and some times older than the rest of the bike, or is this just indicative of the way a bike evolved as and when bits wore out/shiny chi chi things came onto the market.

Then and again, whilst we have BOTM, we dont really have a 'concours' type of competitiveness, despite the amount of NOS stuff that seems to be floating around.

 

[mrkawasaki]

.

Whilst I think I can fully understand the desire, mentality, value and satisfaction in reproducing a catalogue or race replica, the circumstances surrounding my entry point into the UK MTB scene was that a stock bike needed to be customised immediately and regularly with the plethora of shiny, anodised and sometimes suspect parts being boatloaded in from the US of A.

That was the norm in the early nineties (as testified by the volume of stock in the bike shops and the paddock and any national or local race) and that's the feeling I recreate today - with the wonders of eBay.

An upside of steering clear of the replica process for me is that the end result is less 'precious' and more likely to be ridden and 'upgraded' - the fun just goes on and on...

Mr K

 

[theboy]

An upside of steering clear of the replica process for me is that the end result is less 'precious' and more likely to be ridden

gotcha, I guess one of the big differences between 'this' scene, and 'those' scenes is that on the whole MTBs are used for their intended purposes, and its a purpose which sees bikes ridden over rocks and thrown down cliff sides (almost literally) so its hard to be precious about them. Saying that I have seen irreplacable, priceless vintage Bugattis and ERA's thrown around race tracks before, and ocassionally stuffed into a wall...

I personally, I dont have a race mentality about mountain bikes though (I never raced, I didnt go to races, I didnt read the results), so maybe that skews my view of the MTB scene as was, and therefore of the Retro MTB scene now - MrK's point being that an 'out of the box' bike would simply not cut it in the race environment.

 

[dbmtb]

A lot of the bikes that are on here were never available as complete bikes anyway - they were framesets that you had built up as you wanted. So "original spec" is in many cases a red herring.

 

[BoyBurning]

A lot of the bikes that are on here were never available as complete bikes anyway - they were framesets that you had built up as you wanted. So "original spec" is in many cases a red herring.

Exactly what I was about to say...!

 

[kaiser]

A lot of the bikes that are on here were never available as complete bikes anyway - they were framesets that you had built up as you wanted. So "original spec" is in many cases a red herring.

Exactly what I was about to say...!

This is true, but sometimes some folks builds have to have period correct pieces or within x number of years. A nice parallel i think is if anyone has saw american wrecks to riches with Barrys speed shop, no mistaking what the car is but modded sympathetically.