For all you folks who want me to define why I think things before 1960 are "classic." read Richard Sachs post again. It's damn close to my feelings too, I just think it happened ten years early. Also alot of people are saying it's in the racing heyday, I agree. The racing heyday for the rest of the world (aka Europe) was in the 50's. Ride locally, think globally.
I do think since about '85 things have been getting better and the attitudes towards building have gone back to a past days of glory.
enjoy, Brandon Ives
"Nobody can do everything, but if everybody did something everything would get done." Gil Scott-Heron
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, John D wrote:
> . "Except in my opinion classic bikes are
> > generally before 1960, anything after is really contempary."
>
> OK, Monkeyman. I don't necessarily agree or disagree, but I do think that
> your opinion calls for your definition of a "classic bike". Or definition
> of "classic" anything?? Or "vintage"? On what are you basing your opinion?
>
> John Dunn in Napa Valley
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Brandon Ives <monkey37@bluemarble.net>
> To: <Doland.Cheung@sce.com>
> Cc: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Sent: Friday, March 23, 2001 10:16 AM
> Subject: Re: [CR]Pinnicle of the vintage lightweight era?
>
>
> > I'm not going to try to work my way into this can of worms that always
> > ends up with people pissed off. Except in my opinion classic bikes are
> > generally before 1960, anything after is really contempary. Your opinion
> > may vary and you're intitled to it.
> >
> > enjoy,
> > monkeyman aka TheManMonkey (a new one that's a Kraftwerk reference) aka
> > (and to the IRS) Brandon Ives
> > overcast and cool southers Calif.
> >
> > "Nobody can do everything, but if everybody did something everything would
> > get done." Gil Scott-Heron