What exactly is 'period correct'?

[amedias]

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?

there is clearly a difference between 'period correct' and 'catalogue spec' but I think there is also a difference between 'period correct' and 'year correct'

You could quite easily find a 94 bike with 95 components on it for example (even in 95) as someone earlier on in the thread said, upgrading was a big part of life and I would still consider a 94 bike with a pair of after-market 95 forks on to be 'period correct' even though it is no longer 'year correct'

now I've got that out I'm off for a cup of tea...

 

[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.

 

[highlandsflyer]

"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.

 

[SeeingisBelievingGTMuseum]

No that's clearly wrong. There is no reason to limit the meaning of the word 'period' to a year.

Totally disagree with that comment. Purist would say "period Correct is within a year" Someone a step down in collecting would define period correct as within an "ERA". As one who's spec'd bikes for a living during the time being questioned I think you need to start with the parts. During much of the 90's time in question one company and really only one Shimano dictated ERA correct. As I see it the ERAS were 7 vs 8, 8 vs 9. (You guys can go on fighting about brakes but it's the drivetrains that defined ERA and change) Or perhaps for mid to low bikes you could say the Exage ERA, the Hundreds ERA and the STX,/Alivio/Acera/Altus ERA. Think about the change of these ERAS, each of these were unigue and what many of you don't understand is that Shimano gave the bicycle factories and frame builders specs regarding how stays and angles should be designed and such so that the bikes would shift properly per Shimano's component design. Let's face it things changed with what mother Shimano had brought to the market and forced on the children. The brake arguement doesn't hold up because if you have v-brakes you must then also have oversized hubs and hyperdrive cranks to be within the same period/year on a given bike.

 

[Lid]

This is as usual way off....Period correct means:

1 It lasts no more than one week (7 days)
2 There is no blood on the toilet/floor/walls.
3 The bin doesn't have a world war two medical scene going on.
4 I have only had to do three lower back massages over the one week.
5 I get at least one treat.


(Oh yea sorry Dr S for getting those parts......incorrect)

 

[Crum]

When everyone I hang out with uses the term "period correct" It means that when you were modifying your car, you picked a period of time, and got all the parts you wanted that were from that period... If you had a 60's bug, and decided you liked the way people did their customizing in the 70's, you would only put on parts that were avalible in the 70's... Crappy multicolored paint jobs with lots pf pin striping and flakes... Overstuffed tuck and roll interiors, etc.. A set of 20" rims would not work, because they were not around in the 70's....

Most of the time, it refers to when the bike/car/motorcycle was made...

If I list a bike for sale as "'93 Giant Cadex ALM-1... Period correct upgrades" Most people would assume that I used parts that were available around the same time the bike was made.... I added a Manitou 3 fork... Since they were made around the same time as the bike, they would be Period correct.... Adding a set of new Chris King hubs with aero spokes and a carbon rim would not be period correct... Would be cool though...

Anyone who is interpreting it as the entire period from manufacture till now has bent the term so out of shape that it doesn't even know what it means.... If you have a bike from the 80's, and all of your parts are 2010 technology... You DO NOT have a period correct build.... In any stretch of the term...

 

[Dr S]

No that's clearly wrong. There is no reason to limit the meaning of the word 'period' to a year.

Hey GM, these are not my words you quote my friend, could you edit your above post to reflect this?

Thanks
Si

 

[Anthony]

Hey GM, these are not my words you quote my friend, could you edit your above post to reflect this?

Thanks
Si

I think it's clear what he meant, as my name was also there.

I think utahdog has put it very well. The meaning that we place on the word 'period' differs according to the context.

If an estate agent said that an old house had period features, it would be stupid to suggest that everything he was talking about must have been made in the same year as the house was built. Nobody would assume that was what he meant. He would mean sympathetic in style and from around that general time.

 

[Dr.Robotnik]

It's perfectly obvious what period correct is in this context, it's an easy and obvious definition for anyone who's glanced at a vany vintage site. Dr S said it nicely in his first post. We all know it. There is no reason for dispute.

If you want another definition to define bikes upgraded sympathetcially with parts from around the same time, then create one.

People shouldn't be looking on a definitive term as a slight on how they choose to build a bike FOR THEMSELVES.

These threads are odd.

Does my bum look big in this?

 

[Anthony]

It's perfectly obvious what period correct is in this context, it's an easy and obvious definition for anyone who's glanced at a vany vintage site. Dr S said it nicely in his first post. We all know it. There is no reason for dispute.

If you want another definition to define bikes upgraded sympathetcially with parts from around the same time, then create one.

People shouldn't be looking on a definitive term as a slight on how they choose to build a bike FOR THEMSELVES.

These threads are odd.

Does my bum look big in this?

Yes

This isn't a vintage site, it's a retro site. Vintage is about years. Retro is about styles.