What exactly is 'period correct'?

[utahdog2003]

"Period Correct" is a sliding scale. As in the case of, say Hot Rod Cars, you are talking about an industry of modification spanning nearly 75 years. The term 'period' for hot rods, as in, "That would be a period correct modification for that build' would mean that the part would be sympathetic to the build and the period, but not a specific year. It is easier to talk in terms of period mods because the periods are seen as much broader.

In mountain bikes, the history of the modern mountain bike is less than half the age of Hot Rods, so it stands to reason that the 'periods' are much more defined. That does not mean, and I do not think, that they are year specific however. There are certain defining moments in mountain bikes which can be viewed as period specific. Suspension forks, 80mm forks, 100mm forks, v brakes, disc brakes, STI, thumbshifters, Suntour MD, CNC, Fad colors, etc. Designating each of these trends to a specific year and trying to narrow the term 'period' to that level is a mistake. Period means the parts are complementary to one another and to the frame. If you went back in time to 1994 with your bike, would anyone say "Holy shit! Lookit that new fangled thing!" or, "Damn, son...get rid of that creaky POS and upgrade to XYZ" if yes, then you aren't period.

Specific year means nothing to the term "period correct" in cars or bikes. In cars, "Correct for the Year" is the term that I think Dr S and others are defining. I'm not trying to split hairs, and I'm sure there are international regionalisms that apply, but again...in my experience both in cars and in bicycles, "Period Correct" and "Correct for the Year" are very different things.

Reproduction parts, for example, can never be "correct for the year". That would make them original or NOS OEM stock or salvaged. Repro parts are "period correct".

Dr S is actually right and wrong, I think. His retro Schwinn is "period correct" because it is sympathetic to a phase in cycling history. The parts, though, span 75 years. W're understanding of that being defined as period correct, but when the bike gets a little newer and the "periods" become smaller chunks of time, then folks want to act like "Period Correct" is year specific? Hogwash! Why wouldn't a build up of a 1992 Fat chance be considered the same "period" style without meaning that every nut and screw and component came was produced in 1992. If somebody hunted and pecked to make sure that all the parts were either new in 1992, or at least available in the same rendition in 1992, then that build would be "Correct for the Year"

Clear as mud.

Great post.

I get a good one off about every thousand posts. Now I'll go back to spouting brainless drunken diatribes for another 400 posts or so. Stay tuned! :shock:

 

[lankshear1976]

Very intresting Reading . But I have been given a 20 odd year old marin and wish to get it in running order and I'm keeping the original wheels, mechs , bars ect but wish to use more modern cranks and brakes brakes I'm going to add are hs33 magura as I had sets of these in the nineties and I'm using a hollotech crankset and bb as the system is brilliant and lasts . Would I be frowned upon for doing this (I took old crank off today and bb is shot and crank is bent so I have deore hollowtech in the workshop so seems silly to spend cash on period item when this is far superior)

 

[JeRkY]

At the end of the day it is your bike, no one is going to mind, if it was a rare make/model some people may comment and or frown but it is still your bike to do with as you please.

 

[TW85]

just to throw another spanner in the works....

what about model year vs chronological year?

ie: a 93 bike bought in 92 or a 92 bike bought in 93?

this kind of hair splitting is totally unnecessary

for me 'period correct' means stuff that was around at the same time - i.e. by a few years. 'catalogue spec' is for people who don't have a girlfriend

the only self-imposed guideline for me is this -

older frame + newer components is fine, but.. newer frame + older components is probably going to be gash

 

[D_XZ]

Periods in history are generally divided according to an industry changing innovation or direction changing event.

For MTB's you could call a period before and after front sus became norm, Alu replaced steel as the standard frame material, radical geometry changes in more recent times etc...etc...

The trouble is that all these type of periods tend to overlap so the key is finding cleanly defined, consecutive periods.
In that case there is really only one way is to use the same milestones as the bike manufacturers followed - periods of one year.

Everything in production terms has been divided into years by almost every manufacturer. Even when a particular model bike doesn't change in two different years is often given a revamped paint job just for sake of marking it to that period. With this clean structure already there I would say there is not much point in trying to redefine period correct when the manufacturers have done it for us.

Sure we all have our own personal period milestones but we're not going to get a common consensus on that because they are personal

 

[Ductape]

Respectfully,
I would not class your klunker as period correct for 74-75 unless you laced those hubs onto steel rims....

Even in 1975 26" Aluminum wheels were a few years away.
I see Aluminum Wheels on a 75 klunker the same as V brakes on a early 90's ride.
T

 

[Dr S]

Well spotted. I actually have two pairs of wheels for that bike. I tried riding it with the steel rims and it was deadly in the wet (and it rains most of the time here). By fitting the alloy rims I can enjoy riding the bike without risking death. When it is sat about doing nothing in the garage the steels go back on (although it rarely sits unused ).