Would site owners ever consider reform the categories?

[The History Man]

Retro post 98 must have 26” wheels? Keeps 98+ Botm simple
Modern post 98 everything else bicycle shaped regardless of wheel size, power source with no exclusions? MBotm

four categories then

Botm (pre 31/12/97)
98+Botm
Rbotm (pre31/12/97)

Modern Botm post 98 anything goes. But non assisted.
This section could include anything but not in the competition. Eventually e bike bolt on systems will be retro.

 

[hookooekoo]

And that is where the fun starts as there is no clear date.

e.g. Frame angles, started slack, became steeper, and are now going slacker again
e.g. Suspension, amoung others I have a ‘94/95 full sus, a ‘96 hard tail and a ‘97 fully rigid

As such, the cutoff we have now have seems about right even though my ‘98 Kilauea is technically outside the cutoff, it hasn’t stopped me riding and enjoying it on Retrobike rides.

Yep. I knew people riding full suspension in the early to mid 1990s, but they were statistical outliers rather than the norm. It only works if you consider what the big brands and large volume manufacturers were making at that time and selling most. And people on this forum are perhaps not the best to ask, because many are the owners of relatively rare retro bikes, that are not really representative of the type of mountain bike that sold in huge numbers during the 1990s. If I think back to the people I rode with in the early to mid 1990s, most were on fully rigid, and a few had front suspension. The number on full suspension at that time was absolutely tiny, but maybe that's because the people I knew, despite putting all their spare cash into mountain bikes, still didn't have enough for full suspension.

disc's were before V-Brakes...

Were discs mainstream or niche at that point? I suppose one indicator of when discs really took over was that bikes were factory built with rims that had no braking surface, and high end components such as rims with ceramic braking surfaces started disappearing from product catalogues.

 

[FluffyChicken]

Think of the time frames.
In the 80s and MTB became a category of bikes to sell mainly around the mid 80s by 88/89 MTB had matured to be sold more widely to everyday people kids and their dads, mainly as groupset matured.
Shimano and Suntour brought out complete proper groupsets hence popularity could start.
A yearish later, STI and GripShifts, full suspension, front suspension, Threadless, yet more speeds, clipless pedals.. Discs emerging.
V-brakes took over from Canti's as the rim brake but disc wasn't long after as main stream. By early 00's
That's all really within 10-15years.

Only real change since then is wheel sizes, hydroforming and carbon as a normal material and method for frames.
Everything else has evolved but nothing major.

You could include clutch mechs, as that changed things for a lot of people (you can tell when they moan about not having one). Similar for HT2 style crank setups, all done before but now mainstream and completely replaced the bottom bracket setup.

Electrical assist of course.

But anyway, I think that's why people tend to forget the 00s so much.
It's a bit bland bar frame technology and the end of the 'normal' groupsets like the M770/780 before all hell let loose in the 10s with incompatibility, fixing methods and options. But that's ten years of not much, just a gradual 'better'.

I think the 10s has been more of a standards format and change in the MTB setup.

 

[MattiThundrrr]

I think that the bicycle design evolution that started with the Repack gang rebuilding prewar Schwinns for downhill racing came to its pinnacle somewhere in the late 90s, with primo examples being created for the next decade or so. Once Gary started messing with the geometry to make the big wheels he couldn't get in 70s work, the second evolution of mountain bikes began. That's why I think RetroBike needs to be more of a "spirit" as opposed to a definite year. It's hard to pin down when a RetroBike is, but we all know what a RetroBike is

 

[Vesatoro]

That's why I think RetroBike needs to be more of a "spirit" as opposed to a definite year. It's hard to pin down when a RetroBike is, but we all know what a RetroBike is

Exactly. As the years go by, the definition of vintage/retro changes. That's why the more approppriate division now would be:
- vintage (old school) pre 1998 (as that year has been chosen in the past, and should not be changed)
- mid school/retro 1998 and after, but having 26" wheels
- new school of mountain bikes 27,5"/29".
The 26" wheels quite well defines also the geometry, as after 29ers emerged, also the geometries started to evolve slacker. If something is a big divider in mtb evolution, it's the tire 26/29 boundary. Not Canti to V, or even disc brakes. And yes there were the odd 28" bikes with canti brakes in the vintage/retro era too (we all know by heart what is their category).

 

[grey-beard]

What about it just being about the love of and mutual appreciation of bikes?

 

[Betsy]

Retro is such a subjective word.. you ask my 13 yr old to name something retro and he'd probably say Nintendo DS.. you ask @grey-beard and he'd say black and white television.. you ask @The History Man and he'd say mutoscope..

 

[Tsundere]

How about we call MTB's from the late 70's to 1997 as 'Golden Age' bikes?

 

[rwm1962]

Thing is if the categories do change who's going to move all the old threads that will end up being in the wrong category?

 

[Vesatoro]

Thing is if the categories do change who's going to move all the old threads that will end up being in the wrong category?

Maybe someone who does undestand AI could help

Or volunteer members… there are about 8,4k threads. That would be average 84 threads for 100 volunteers. Not a bad task. When there's will, there's way. But need the will first.