Show us some Retrobike crimes.

[pete_mcc]

I suspect the reality really is, though, that back in the 80s, most here would have been chuffed to bits to be riding around on the very bikes that are frequently labelled as "shite" these days.

I am sure all of us were chuffed to bits with them, but then I was also chuffed to bits with £1.50 pocket money. Doesn't mean that I'd be happy to trade that for my current salary for nostalgias sake.

And for the record, i knew how bad those bikes were every time I hit my bollocks on that small (for the time) 20" bike.

We can't look back with misty eyes at the past and say thing were great when they weren't, the sport was finding it's feet and making many mistakes. There were many expensive duds: the Trek springboard bike, the Checker Pig leaf suspension, browning electronic shifting, flexible suspension handlebars, elastomer suspended hubs (yes, both those last two existed!).
There were many 'bandwagon jumpers' who joined at the start, captured the lower end of the market with pseudoMTB when we knew no better; the Raleigh mustangs and Apollo Rages being examples. Now we have supermarket BSO that take their place and there are few desperately bad £250 bikes from the big players.

But that progress comes at a cost: there is less room now for the eccentric inventors and the innovators, bikes today are like modern cars- bland and very similar with next to no duds, but with next to no stars. Take a badge off a ford, vw, fiat or seat and they look the same and the same happens for the generic marins, treks, and specialized today.

Surely this is the joy of riding retro - the quirky, the odd, the innovation. Just not the White Dog Shite

 

[Neil]

I suspect the reality really is, though, that back in the 80s, most here would have been chuffed to bits to be riding around on the very bikes that are frequently labelled as "shite" these days.

I am sure all of us were chuffed to bits with them, but then I was also chuffed to bits with £1.50 pocket money. Doesn't mean that I'd be happy to trade that for my current salary for nostalgias sake.

I'm not suggesting that - I'm merely pointing out that of their time, many of these bikes, so easily criticised, were of their time.

Of course, looking back, comparing with innovations, evolution and newer designs, everything can be painted as crap - but all the same history remains un-rewritten.

We can't look back with misty eyes at the past and say thing were great when they weren't,

I'm not suggesting that - let's not do the whole baby and bathwater thing.

I'm merely suggesting that being entirely revisionist about our experiences BITD, is just as bad as being entirely euphemistic and magnolia about things.

There's a distinct difference between saying that some things were perfectly fine at the time, although subsequently improved, to simply being revisionist and saying they were completely crap.

the sport was finding it's feet and making many mistakes. There were many expensive duds: the Trek springboard bike, the Checker Pig leaf suspension, browning electronic shifting, flexible suspension handlebars, elastomer suspended hubs (yes, both those last two existed!).

And I'm not suggesting that things that were truly bad, and recognised as bad BITD should be labelled as anything else.

All I'm saying is that there are bikes that were fine in their time, that people used quite happily - and sure, may well have been comprehensively improved on since - but in their time people were quite happy with and pleased to ride, that can just as easily be dismissed as crap, these days, because it suits now.

There were many 'bandwagon jumpers' who joined at the start, captured the lower end of the market with pseudoMTB when we knew no better; the Raleigh mustangs and Apollo Rages being examples. Now we have supermarket BSO that take their place and there are few desperately bad £250 bikes from the big players.

I'm not talking about BSOs, though. I'm simply talking about bikes that were perfectly competent in their time, being labelled as crap, now, because many are quite happy to ignore what they enjoyed BITD - almost as if it's now an embarrassment - in favour of the things that they feel should have been important, BITD, but most could probably not afford or were probably blissfully unaware of.

Surely this is the joy of riding retro - the quirky, the odd, the innovation. Just not the White Dog Shite

And I'm not talking about celebrating bikes that were recognised as being pants at the time - I'm simply talking about not being revisionist about perfectly competent bikes that many were more than happy with BITD, but their modern pretensions tell them they must ignore and trash in favour of things with more historical significance, "interest" or "quality", that's all...

I've nothing against the celebration of all the things you've mentioned. I just question why it seems to have to be often done at the expense or criticism of things that people were perfectly content with BITD (crap bikes and BSOs notwithstanding).

 

[Tad]

Possibly not a 'retro crime', more a historic folly:

Looks period correct to me

Stick a huuuuuuuge down hill set of forks on it and Retrocrime it is.

 

[sunchaser]

presenting my kona fire mountain.

first of all it was redone in white, add to the mix a huge shopping list. the fork and cranks alone would have retailed new at over the cost of a new fire mountain.

the bike was drapes in components well above the humble frame.

i thought it looked great but i was too scared to ride it. thankfully its now been broken and sold off.

This classic case of 'delusion of grandeur' can easily be forgiven - very nice choice of components on a nice frame that might have been better suited a singlespeed project

 

[raymondluxuryyacht]

You want a crime....
How about the saddle angle on this:
http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/files/unknown_180.jpg

 

[marin man]

^^pmsl

 

[raymondluxuryyacht]

Thanks.
I guess its a middlesboro thang ;-)

 

[marin man]

What being in pain........or making your bike look like a trials bike :?

 

[raymondluxuryyacht]

Both I suspect

 

[pete_mcc]

..a shed load of very sensible stuff..

Totally agree, couldn't be closer to my view! As always most sensible arguments are two totally aligned points of view separated by subtitles of text.

And I'm not talking about celebrating bikes that were recognised as being pants at the time

I like that line the most, not sure why.....