How long does it take for a bike/frame to be considered vintage?- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 17 of 17
  1. #1

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    236

    How long does it take for a bike/frame to be considered vintage?

    Hi guys,

    I know that for cars, it's around 20-25 years to be considered a collection car, but I don't know for bikes. So I hope you can help me out.

    Thanks a lot,
    I really like your vintage forum,

    Jean-Sébastien

  2. #2
    Hill crawler
    Reputation: TruckeeLocal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    314

    Cool-blue Rhythm My guess is ...

    That a bike/frame becomes vintage once
    • the original manufacturer is out of business or taken over by an industry heavy weight
    • was originally built by a guy with a beer in one hand and a welding torch in the other
    • is old enough that revisionist history has forgotton the flaws of the design
    • cost more in its day than an equivalent currently available bike
    • is rare 'cause the market didn't want to buy the design
    • was well enough built that it has survived the ravages of time and hasn't been sent to the dump (yet)


    I have three vintage bikes - two Ritcheys and a Bontrager and another two that made the dump run - a Peugot and a Fangio with an Alan cf frame and Campy nuevo record
    Last edited by TruckeeLocal; 02-02-2004 at 09:56 AM.

  3. #3
    VRC Illuminati
    Reputation: Rumpfy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    17,648
    Quote Originally Posted by TruckeeLocal
    That a bike/frame becomes vintage once
    • the original manufacturer is out of business or taken over by an industry heavy weight
    • was originally built by a guy with a beer in one hand and a welding torch in the other
    • is old enough that revisionist history has forgotton the flaws of the design
    • cost more in its day than an equivalent currently available bike
    • is rare 'cause the market didn't want to buy the design
    • was well enough built that it has survived the ravages of time and hasn't been sent to the dump (yet)


    I have three vintage bikes - two Ritcheys and a Bontrager and another two that made the dump run - a Peugot and a Fangio with an Alan cf frame and Campy nuevo record
    Ooh...that's a pretty good list.

    I like to use a rolling 10 year.
    Even a base model 6-banger Vintage Mustang is worth a bit more now than it was way back...perhaps not as much the case with bikes.
    -eric-

    http://www.rumpfy.com
    Wanted: NDS Suntour XC Pro Microdrive 175mm Crank Arm.

  4. #4
    Hill crawler
    Reputation: TruckeeLocal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    314

    Talking of Mustangs

    Quote Originally Posted by Rumpfy
    Ooh...that's a pretty good list.

    I like to use a rolling 10 year.
    Even a base model 6-banger Vintage Mustang is worth a bit more now than it was way back...perhaps not as much the case with bikes.
    Thanks. I have a friend who had a '66 convertable with a 6-banger. It was a piece of junk which just goes to show that the 'revisionist history' thing has a huge degree of validity. Incidentally my classic car was a '77 Pontiac Grand Prix (I gave it away for charity) which just goes to show that I can show incredibly poor judgement in cars as well as in bikes. At least the charity did well, but I loved that car.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: laffeaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,983
    Quote Originally Posted by TruckeeLocal
    Thanks. I have a friend who had a '66 convertable with a 6-banger. It was a piece of junk which just goes to show that the 'revisionist history' thing has a huge degree of validity. Incidentally my classic car was a '77 Pontiac Grand Prix (I gave it away for charity) which just goes to show that I can show incredibly poor judgement in cars as well as in bikes. At least the charity did well, but I loved that car.
    As you prove, the trouble with using a rolling date is sometimes old things are simply that... old things. Many old cars will never be collectables. Much old architecture is not "good" architecture. And many old bikes really are just old bikes.

    I think it varries by individual. Some people look at my '97 Bontrager and call it retro. To me it's a fully functional modern bike, hardly retro. I'm not sure if you'll ever get anyone to agree on a definition for retro or classic.

    And speaking of Mustangs, I had a '66 hardtop with a 200ci engine and an automatic transmission. I don't think it was "junk." It wasn't fast, but it had a certain uniqueness (and "classic" quality) to it - especially after plowing into a parked van during a show storm in '86.

  6. #6
    Hill crawler
    Reputation: TruckeeLocal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    314

    We're violently agreeing (I think)

    Quote Originally Posted by laffeaux
    As you prove, the trouble with using a rolling date is sometimes old things are simply that... old things. Many old cars will never be collectables. Much old architecture is not "good" architecture. And many old bikes really are just old bikes.

    I think it varries by individual. Some people look at my '97 Bontrager and call it retro. To me it's a fully functional modern bike, hardly retro. I'm not sure if you'll ever get anyone to agree on a definition for retro or classic.

    And speaking of Mustangs, I had a '66 hardtop with a 200ci engine and an automatic transmission. I don't think it was "junk." It wasn't fast, but it had a certain uniqueness (and "classic" quality) to it - especially after plowing into a parked van during a show storm in '86.
    But to continue the analogy. At the time your '66 wasn't junk. But now ? Compared to a new $15k Mustang ? Time heals some wounds but meanwhile technology and functionality advances. My '03 Ellsworth is a far more advanced machine than my '96 Bontrager. Sort of. 'Til we remember that bike technology is 150 years old and the main advances in the past decade have been some frame materials, disk brakes, and rear suspension designs. Everything else has moved at a snails pace (like me up a 10 mile fire road climb). But riding a 20 year old bike is a perfectly acceptable alternative, even a junker, compared to driving a 20 year old car (let alone a 40 year old one) which is a dangerous proposition in these days of monsterous SUVs and anti-lock brakes.

    Damn it if I don't still use my Bontrager (Ti-Lite) half the time I go out though. What is wrong with me ?

  7. #7
    VRC Illuminati
    Reputation: Rumpfy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    17,648
    Quote Originally Posted by laffeaux
    As you prove, the trouble with using a rolling date is sometimes old things are simply that... old things. Many old cars will never be collectables. Much old architecture is not "good" architecture. And many old bikes really are just old bikes.

    I think it varries by individual. Some people look at my '97 Bontrager and call it retro. To me it's a fully functional modern bike, hardly retro. I'm not sure if you'll ever get anyone to agree on a definition for retro or classic.

    And speaking of Mustangs, I had a '66 hardtop with a 200ci engine and an automatic transmission. I don't think it was "junk." It wasn't fast, but it had a certain uniqueness (and "classic" quality) to it - especially after plowing into a parked van during a show storm in '86.
    Tis not a fitting end for any vintage Mustang.
    Mustangs are a good example as well. In the late 70's and 80's, they weren't worth squat. There is nothing all that 'special' about the average Mustang. They were a poor man's Vette back in the day. But somehow, they became a sought after car. A reminder of one's youth, perhaps. To own that car you always wanted growing up but could never afford. Mustang Shelbys went from used ex-track cars of $3-4k to $50k collector pieces. Who would have thought!
    We might be seeing a little bit of that with high end Kleins, and Fats, ect....any 'speciality' bike.
    It remains to be seen if it will trickle on down the line.
    Your MB-0 or MB-1 might be worth a bit...but that MB-127 you own might not cut it.

    As for Mustangs, my baby has gone up in value in the short 4 years I've owned it.

    -eric-

    http://www.rumpfy.com
    Wanted: NDS Suntour XC Pro Microdrive 175mm Crank Arm.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: laffeaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,983

    I'm not sure about violence

    Quote Originally Posted by TruckeeLocal
    But to continue the analogy. At the time your '66 wasn't junk. But now ? Compared to a new $15k Mustang ? Time heals some wounds but meanwhile technology and functionality advances. My '03 Ellsworth is a far more advanced machine than my '96 Bontrager. Sort of. 'Til we remember that bike technology is 150 years old and the main advances in the past decade have been some frame materials, disk brakes, and rear suspension designs. Everything else has moved at a snails pace (like me up a 10 mile fire road climb). But riding a 20 year old bike is a perfectly acceptable alternative, even a junker, compared to driving a 20 year old car (let alone a 40 year old one) which is a dangerous proposition in these days of monsterous SUVs and anti-lock brakes.

    Damn it if I don't still use my Bontrager (Ti-Lite) half the time I go out though. What is wrong with me ?
    We're definitely agreeing. I hope not violently though.

    I think bike advances are fairly minimal compared to cars - especailly bikes made since the early '90s. I own a Blur also, and although it's a great riding bike, I still put nearly as many miles on my Bontrager as I do on the Blur - probably 800 miles on the Blur and 500 on the Bontrager last year. That does not count the miles put on the other older bikes either. In fact, I haven't ridden the Blur since November. All of my off-road miles have been on my CX, other than one ride on a '95 Yeti hardtail. Unless a trail is incredibly rocky, or unless I absolutely have to be going as fast as I can, I grab a hardtail as often as I grab my FS.

    In comparison, I have cars from '97 and a '71. The '97 definitely seems many more miles per year than the '71 - but that might because my bike doesn't fit into the '71.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: laffeaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,983
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumpfy
    As for Mustangs, my baby has gone up in value in the short 4 years I've owned it.

    R,

    When are you going to give me a ride in that thing! You can have my 240 for a weekend, and I'll take yours out for a spin. Deal?

  10. #10
    VRC Illuminati
    Reputation: Rumpfy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    17,648
    Quote Originally Posted by laffeaux
    R,

    When are you going to give me a ride in that thing! You can have my 240 for a weekend, and I'll take yours out for a spin. Deal?
    Sounds fair to me.

    I've been out of the loop with the vintage Mustang crowd. All my time has been here in the VRC forum (and eBay)...but only when it's raining.

    We all got out a few summers ago and had 20+ vintage Mustangs making their way up skyline.
    Here's a picture of all the cars right at about the Christmas Tree lot on Skyline (after Peters Creek loop/Grizzly, ect.)<----MTB content


    At the end of the day there were eight cars left sniffing 100mph down 1 from HMB.


    I'll let you know of the next event coming up....but I'm getting a bit off topic...
    -eric-

    http://www.rumpfy.com
    Wanted: NDS Suntour XC Pro Microdrive 175mm Crank Arm.

  11. #11

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    236

    Thanks to all !

    I guess I will have to wait 8-10 years to even think about calling it retro !
    So thanks again,

    Jean-Sébastien

  12. #12

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    120

    My criteria

    Hard to find, but there's people out there looking.

    I don't think you can make a hard and fast definition of what's vintage. Its one of those supply and demand kind of things. What's considered vintage now will probably remain that way, but who's to say what its going to be in 10 years? How many of you are buying new stuff in anticipation of future collectability? And if you are, how often will you be right in your assessment?

  13. #13

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    236

    good point...

    It's hard to define I agree. I didn't buy my bike to make it a vintage one, definitely not. But what I like to do is combining both worlds, 'cause it's a Y2K frame outfitted with recent parts and I'm planning to keep the frame and upgrade the parts as the years go by. And even if it's not considered as vintage by the community, I will still love it, because it's old (but still nice). One thing I did on my trial bike, is that I fitted a 1978 Spidel Maillard skewer on a DT Hügi 240, it does add some style .

    By the way, nice Mustangs !

    Jean-Sébastien

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: laffeaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,983

    Old Skewers

    Quote Originally Posted by jean-seb
    One thing I did on my trial bike, is that I fitted a 1978 Spidel Maillard skewer on a DT Hügi 240, it does add some style .
    My commuter bike is a 1980 Peugeot road bike. I got tired of breaking spokes on the 20+ year old wheels and bought a brand new wheel (fairly cheap one too). The new wheel looked odd on the bike. However after swaping out the new skewer for the original 1980 Simplex skewer is looks much nicer. It's the little things that make a difference.

  15. #15

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,079
    I didn't know this was a combo bike/car vintage forum. Here's my vintage car - 64 chevy II. The vintage Salsa and Ibis both fit in the trunk.
    Last edited by ssmike; 08-19-2006 at 08:13 AM.

  16. #16
    VRC Illuminati
    Reputation: Rumpfy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    17,648
    Quote Originally Posted by ssmike
    I didn't know this was a combo bike/car vintage forum. Here's my vintage car - 64 chevy II. The vintage Salsa and Ibis both fit in the trunk.
    Ooooh, sleeper. And practical if you can fit two vintage in the trunk!
    -eric-

    http://www.rumpfy.com
    Wanted: NDS Suntour XC Pro Microdrive 175mm Crank Arm.

  17. #17

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,079
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumpfy
    Ooooh, sleeper. And practical if you can fit two vintage in the trunk!

    Very sleepy. Two is a push because there's a 22 gal fuel cell back there.

Similar Threads

  1. Salt ingestion in long rides
    By Spiff in forum Riding Passion
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 02-02-2004, 12:55 PM
  2. What is considered a long "storage" period for battery storage?
    By linerider in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-23-2004, 08:48 PM
  3. No 2004 Adrenalin race in Colorado (long rant)
    By crosstrail in forum Endurance XC Racing
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-14-2004, 11:06 AM

Members who have read this thread: 4

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.